Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Neovim

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 372 posts

Re: Neovim

#101

Post by TylerE »

Crito wrote: post #75
tinco wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not, I need the human readable source part, so I can track my work and cooperate in git :) I use LibreOffice for some stuff though.

Aren't modern word processor formats just zipped-up XML files? I suspect it should be a straight-forward matter to get at least LibreOffice and version control cooperating.

You are technically correct, but not usefully so. The XML is pretty hairy. A VCS that handles XML semantically (e.g. tag-pair oriented, rather than line-oriented) might have some shot....but, basically, merges are more or less not going to work so it's not really version control, just backups.

Re: Neovim

#102

Post by rjzzleep »

gradstudent wrote: post #100
tinco wrote: post #29

Thanks for trying to do what many of us secretly wished we could do but can't because of time/skill constraints. I will definitely move to NeoVim the second it's packaged (is it yet?), regardless if you've changed anything yet. I hate the ideas many programmers have about backwards compatibility, that it's more important than development speed and modern concepts. There is nothing holy about Unix era software, chance…

> Look at SublimeText, it's got 1% of the features of Vim, yet it's converting Vim users left and right, by its sheer usability. You're confounding usability with "do not need a manual". They're not the same thing at all. Moreover, I reject entirely your assertion that vim is not usable. vim is amazingly usable; text manipulation commands for example all follow a common structure: [action][times][position]. That mean…

not too mention that vim became hip only in the last couple of years.

saying it's converting vim users left and right is a little far fetched. most of those users never had any real vim muscle memory to begin with. a lot of "vim" users i saw work just fine without motion commands. the only reason they used it was because they could use it anywhere. whether it's modal or not is totally irrelevant to them.

Re: Neovim

#103

Post by jamesgeck0 »

bayesianhorse wrote: post #80
standardfoil wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't tell if you are actually serious about the above or not, especially path 1.

Even if it sounds like sacrilege to some, I am putting it out there for comment. Both ideas arose from the dissatisfaction with text editing, one in the browser, and the other in the mobile space where currently almost nobody uses a text editor. Especially the "modal html5 editor" would be useful across a variety of websites, either built into the site or the browser itself. For example it would be nice to have plugi…

Path 2 is actually something you could do with neovim. The editor's core and it's UI would be decoupled, so you could put whatever UI you wanted to build on top of it relatively easily.

Re: Neovim

#104

Post by rjzzleep »

chongli wrote: post #69
tinco wrote: post #29

Thanks for trying to do what many of us secretly wished we could do but can't because of time/skill constraints. I will definitely move to NeoVim the second it's packaged (is it yet?), regardless if you've changed anything yet. I hate the ideas many programmers have about backwards compatibility, that it's more important than development speed and modern concepts. There is nothing holy about Unix era software, chance…

We as developers in the Open Source community should be ashamed people are still using Vim to write LaTeX in Bash running on terminal emulators. What?! You can take my vim+bash+tmux+urxvt when you pry it from my cold, dead hands!

i so wish any of the terminal emulators in osx had the scriptability that urxvt has. i miss it all the time :/

Re: Neovim

#105

Post by dagi3d »

cicero wrote: post #38
tinco wrote: post #29

Thanks for trying to do what many of us secretly wished we could do but can't because of time/skill constraints. I will definitely move to NeoVim the second it's packaged (is it yet?), regardless if you've changed anything yet. I hate the ideas many programmers have about backwards compatibility, that it's more important than development speed and modern concepts. There is nothing holy about Unix era software, chance…

I don't see anything shameful about using old software if it works well and suits your needs. Yes, new editors like SublimeText have advantages, and if you prefer them over Vim, use them. However, I've seen many projects undergo a rewrite in order to move to new technology, but they never matched the utility of the old technology they were trying to replace. I'm not saying it can't happen, but that it often doesn't.…

>I don't use Vim much now because I work a lot in Windows, and Vim got me into the habit of hitting escape when I was through entering text, but escape cancels the input in a lot of programs. However, I still use it in the shell or when I need to make certain global edits.

some people discourage the use of the Esc key and prefer to use Ctrl-c instead. I'd recommend to disable it and force to use the Ctrl-c combo. I did it and completely forgot about the Esc key(actually I find it more comfortable)

Re: Neovim

#106

Post by chongli »

tinco wrote: post #35
fournm wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with almost everything--except for backwards compatibility when it comes to throwing stuff out. There is definite value in it, especially when we're talking about something as old and widely used as vim! The thing about compatibility is that it doesn't matter how great your new and shiny is if it can't talk to old things at all. Imagine the best new text editor in the world, but it's completely incompatible w…

I agree with almost everything--except for backwards compatibility when it comes to throwing stuff out. There is definite value in it, especially when we're talking about something as old and widely used as vim! This is the part where people are surprised, but I am an extremist. I definitely think backwards compatibility should be among the lowest priorities when making decisions on improving software, especially and…

First, every vim plugin would break. But if you look at how many Vim plugins are actually used, I would be surprised if the top 100 Vim plugins covered less than 99.99% of all Vim users. That means we only have to upgrade 100 Vim plugins, and probably just a couple of lines if they're written well.

Please don't invent fake statistics in order to support your argument. Vim's plugin ecosystem has a long tail distribution[0]. After just a cursory glance at vim.org's script repository you'll notice that even the 141st ranked plugin[1] has over 10,000 downloads. To find the first plugin with less than 1,000 downloads, you'll have to drop all the way down to sql.vim[2] which happens to be ranked 1501!

Personally, I happen to use (daily) multiple plugins which are ranked outside the top 1000.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_tail

[1] http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=483

[2] http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=905

Re: Neovim

#107

Post by rjzzleep »

Thiago if you read this, please do your fundraiser a favor and mention all the work and review that went into your thread safe message queue already.

There is a lot of skepticism about your capability of delivering, but i think it's clear that you already have the experience needed.

Re: Neovim

#108

Post by Jach »

dagi3d wrote: post #105
cicero wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see anything shameful about using old software if it works well and suits your needs. Yes, new editors like SublimeText have advantages, and if you prefer them over Vim, use them. However, I've seen many projects undergo a rewrite in order to move to new technology, but they never matched the utility of the old technology they were trying to replace. I'm not saying it can't happen, but that it often doesn't.…

>I don't use Vim much now because I work a lot in Windows, and Vim got me into the habit of hitting escape when I was through entering text, but escape cancels the input in a lot of programs. However, I still use it in the shell or when I need to make certain global edits. some people discourage the use of the Esc key and prefer to use Ctrl-c instead. I'd recommend to disable it and force to use the Ctrl-c combo. I d…

I have a habit of typing 'jkjk...' in command mode when I'm thinking, and eventually I got sick of stretching my fingers to escape into command mode so I just used 'jk' as my escape sequence.

    imap jk
Of course now in non-vim editors I sometimes have to undo the occasional jk sequence... But my point is that the escape key can be whatever people want it to be.

Re: Neovim

#109

Post by jude- »

rjzzleep wrote: post #102
gradstudent wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Look at SublimeText, it's got 1% of the features of Vim, yet it's converting Vim users left and right, by its sheer usability. You're confounding usability with "do not need a manual". They're not the same thing at all. Moreover, I reject entirely your assertion that vim is not usable. vim is amazingly usable; text manipulation commands for example all follow a common structure: [action][times][position]. That mean…

not too mention that vim became hip only in the last couple of years. saying it's converting vim users left and right is a little far fetched. most of those users never had any real vim muscle memory to begin with. a lot of "vim" users i saw work just fine without motion commands. the only reason they used it was because they could use it anywhere. whether it's modal or not is totally irrelevant to them.

> not too mention that vim became hip only in the last couple of years.

Wait, what? Vim has been in use for a lot longer than that (it was released in 1991), and vi even longer (1976).

Re: Neovim

#110

Post by [deleted] »

tinco wrote: post #64
roel_v wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a user of software - fuck you, and may you never touch anything I use. It's juvenile oo-look-shiny nonsense like this that makes us people who just want to get shit done waste yet another afternoon on patching working stuff after a (forced) update because some wet behind the ears dude decided that everybody before him was a utter moron. There is a reason people pay for software that just works, and will work for t…

Haha, thanks roel. I'm so glad to be relieved of the duty to try to improve things you use... And let me extend my apologies in name of all the authors of software whose extra features and nice bug-freeness you enjoyed at the terrible cost of going through the gruelling process of having to upgrade your software. Perhaps all us developers of modern software could get together raise funds so you could get a refurbishe…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN