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

351–360 of 372 posts

Re: Neovim

#351

Post by jbrechtel »

hueving wrote: post #256
tinco wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's unfair of me to point the blame at mr Eich with the 'the author'. Javascript definitely was no small feat and has withstood the test of time very well. My point lies more in the '20 years' part of the argument, that in all that time we couldn't get these wrinkles ironed out.

>My point lies more in the '20 years' part of the argument, that in all that time we couldn't get these wrinkles ironed out. Javascript has the requirement of backwards compatibility. The limitation is not technical. It's disingenuous to suggest it's so simple to replace these things or it's extremely naive. Look at the recent HTTP redirect article for example. Something as simple as redirects have been implemented i…

I don't see tinco saying it is simple to replace these things. Where do you see that? I suspect you're unconsciously framing tinco's position this way...

Another possible way to interpret the 'ashamed' statement is that tinco is simply saying we should be trying harder to move forward when we are using such old technologies with such warts. Why can't we get rid of the warts? We should try harder. Perhaps this is what tinco is saying? I think at least equally plausible to the naive position you're projecting onto tinco...that it's 'simple' to replace these things.

Kudos to Neovim for making the effort! It is certainly appreciated.

Re: Neovim

#352

Post by eyko »

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 hate the ideas many programmers have about backwards compatibility, unless it affects me." – FTFY

> "There is nothing holy about Unix era software, chances are it's shit and a lot of it should be thrown out."

1. we're still very much in the "Unix era"

2. There's nothing holy about software at all. Rules shouldn't be broken, but rules can be broken.

> 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.

If anything I'd say Vim is converting TextMate/SublimeText left and right. Most SublimeText users are former TextMate, and many new Vim users are former SublimeText users.

> 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

Speak for yourself. I don't personally write LaTeX but I still very much use the shell, and Vim.

Re: Neovim

#353

Post by mazesc »

jojoo wrote: post #348
jessah wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you get pagination with markdown? I would like to switch to markdown instead of using latex, because my needs are simple. But how can I convert markdown into something with support for pagination?

i actually converted it to rtf and imported it then in MS Word (On OS X). I took care of pagination there. Actually the Plan was to typeset it in Indesign, but as i woke up the day of the final layout i just decided to do it in Word.

Saying that this toolchain is better than using Latex is so hilarious :D

I'll just pretend it's a parody.

Re: Neovim

#355

Post by jhasse »

flyrain wrote: post #323
skrebbel wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're completely missing the GP's point. Whether or not LaTeX is better than MS Word for task X is besides the point. It's that LaTeX has many obvious opportunities for improvement, ways to drag it into the current age, while keeping all its fundamental strengths. As do many similarly old tools such as Bash, terminal emulators and Vim. These improvements aren't all that difficult to imagine, but they don't happen, b…

Agree. Texmacs is a good idea. Unfortunately it don't attract much attention, it is still not very mature as Vim or Emacs. I hope the community could pay attention to Texmacs.

LyX works more reliable in my experience: http://lyx.org

Re: Neovim

#356

Post by jhasse »

Perseids wrote: post #343
markdennehy wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why expend manpower and energy improving a working solution just to do so when you have so many other broken things that need fixing first? That's a fairly self-answering question. There's a reason the expression is "If it's not broken, don't fix it".

If you fear breaking it, why not replace / revolutionize instead. See GCC vs LLVM, X vs Wayland, C++ vs Go.

> C++ vs Go

Bad example :P

Re: Neovim

#357

Post by jhasse »

coldtea wrote: post #295
markdennehy wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could just use LaTeX, which has been used for writing books for decades (the word you're looking for is "debugged" and the phrase is either "well understood" or "well documented"). And yes, there are efforts underway to improve it (LaTeX3) but 2e works so well, there's not been much drive there. And if you find LaTeX is so hard, there's always LyX...

> which has been used for writing books for decades Well, mostly math and science books. Very few (if any) fancy and well typespeced books by major publishers have been made with LaTeX. I know, because I know that industry. So, while TeX was once created to be a general typesetting solution, it has been relegated to something math and cs geeks use for their papers. > And if you find LaTeX is so hard, there's always L…

> A not really maintained, relic of a program, [...]

http://www.lyx.org/trac/timeline

Re: Neovim

#358

Post by leephillips »

laichzeit0 wrote: post #212

If you can make Vim seamlessly work with a REPL then this would be worth me upgrading (if all my current vim plugins still work). It's the only reason I use Emacs + Evil + trying to get it to be as close to a Vim clone as possible. You know how cool it is to type ":" instead of M-x?

"If you can make Vim seamlessly work with a REPL"

Have you tried the ScreenSend vim plugin? I use it for Python and Clojure, and occasionally other REPLized languages.

Re: Neovim

#359

Post by microtonal »

orbifold wrote: post #273
microtonal wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not slow, it runs in under a second on most documents I have authored. It is slow. On my PhD thesis, it took more than one minute at some point, on an SSD. Not very convenient if you are tweaking figures and equations, and want to preview a change quickly.

Then you did it wrong. You should have just factored your thesis in multiple files, for example used one for each chapter.

My thesis was split in multiple files.

Re: Neovim

#360

Post by rwl »

coldtea wrote: post #295
markdennehy wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could just use LaTeX, which has been used for writing books for decades (the word you're looking for is "debugged" and the phrase is either "well understood" or "well documented"). And yes, there are efforts underway to improve it (LaTeX3) but 2e works so well, there's not been much drive there. And if you find LaTeX is so hard, there's always LyX...

> which has been used for writing books for decades Well, mostly math and science books. Very few (if any) fancy and well typespeced books by major publishers have been made with LaTeX. I know, because I know that industry. So, while TeX was once created to be a general typesetting solution, it has been relegated to something math and cs geeks use for their papers. > And if you find LaTeX is so hard, there's always L…

>Very few (if any) fancy and well typespeced books by major publishers have been made with LaTeX. I know, because I know that industry.

What do they use, then? (I'm actually pretty curious, because I am writing a dissertation that I currently build with LaTeX, but I find it much nicer to write in Org mode. I'm doing whatever I can to avoid a hard dependency on LaTeX for the backend, and to allow exporting to multiple formats.)

Why do they use whatever typesetting solution(s) they use? Does it actually produce better/nicer output than LaTeX (for non-math text)? Does it just have nicer syntax or friendlier error messages? What's the advantage?

Post reply on HN