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

Neovim's Next Feature Poll

neovim.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 105 posts

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#81

Post by icholy »

Morgawr wrote: post #56
edanm wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Macros and global replace are substitutes, sure, but they're not at all the same thing . And while I'm no vim wizard, I have used it as my main editor for 4+ years, and have a 1500 line vimrc and plenty of plugins (including my own), so you don't get to assume I don't grok the vim way of thinking :) I've heard the "macros is the same" sentiment many times, and usually it's from people who have never had much experien…

>In fact, many of the people arguing against multi-cursors have been convinced after trying them that they are better. Fact by who? >The basic problem with macros and global replace is that they don't happen immediately and don't give you feedback. I don't know any vim user who hasn't had the distinct pleasure of needing 3 tries to record a macro before they got it right. True about macros, which are a very powerful…

They don't bring anything new in the same way a repl doesn't bring anything new to a edit/compile/run cycle. Instant feedback is just better.

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#82

Post by [deleted] »

hk__2 wrote: post #38
edanm wrote: post #36

Please, please implement multi-cursor support. For anyone that doesn't agree, please read my previous post on HN on the topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1625382 I wrote to Thiago about this already, but we don't even need multi-cursor support - just a few additional hooks so we can implement a multi-cursor plugin. Although to be honest, making it part of core is vastly preferable, since it is a hard featur…

What problems can you solve with multi-cursors that you can’t with actual features like block selection?

[deleted]

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#83

Post by wirrbel »

Simucal wrote: post #78

Thiago claims that one of Vim's biggest problems is its lack of testing infrastructure. It is difficult to refactor or make changes without the chance of introducing some possibly obscure regression. This is probably a big part of Bram's reluctance to merge large changesets from other developers. I honestly thing if he can successfully pull off this "msgpack UI" and get a solid set of tests written (which the communi…

The whole approach makes a lot of sense. Successful refactoring goes hand in hand with setting up a test environment. Code that is not covered by unit tests is legacy code. Without tests, you have to fear breaking things and fear is a bad starting point for development.

I backed Neovim and I really hope that it succeeds. I think the Vim codebase is criticized a little too harshly in general. It is a child of its time.

Whether Lua is the optimal choice as an extension language remains to be seen, yet it is a very pragmatic choice and over time we will see that the C core of vim will shrink dramatically.

I seriously hope that Bram Molenaar is not offended by the fork (and I think he is not). For the vim community having neovim as an independent development line will have its merrits until it is clear whether the fork can replace the proven editor.

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#84

Post by jimejim »

edanm wrote: post #55
Afal wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can get multiple cursors with this plugin (works better than I expected) https://github.com/terryma/vim-multiple-cursors

It works, and definitely better than other tries, but it's not even close to Sublime Text's caliber. Through no fault of the author, I assure you, as someone who's tried his hand at creating a similar plugin for vim and found many limitations of vim. One easy limitation comes to mind - you can't copy-paste different cursors, then paste them as unique items. E.g., given a list "a, b, c", I want to be able to multi-cur…

Maybe I'm not understanding the example, but is what you're suggesting (copy/paste) even possible in sublime? The github plugin above is the closest I've seen to sublime's version. It's not perfect, but works for most of the basic use cases.

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#85

Post by bdamm »

gkya wrote: post #71
edanm wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Macros and global replace are substitutes, sure, but they're not at all the same thing . And while I'm no vim wizard, I have used it as my main editor for 4+ years, and have a 1500 line vimrc and plenty of plugins (including my own), so you don't get to assume I don't grok the vim way of thinking :) I've heard the "macros is the same" sentiment many times, and usually it's from people who have never had much experien…

> [I] have a 1500 line vimrc and plenty of plugins (including my own), so you don't get to assume I don't grok the vim way of thinking :) This may only show that you grok VimScript way of thinking, not Vim way of thinking. You need not re-record a macro, a macro is stored in a register. Just edit the register, and you're good to go with you new, (supposedly) improved macro. In Vim, you edit in Normal mode, and insert…

My .vimrc used to be large, but now has dwindled down to a handful of simple commands. I've simply adapted to be maximally productive in a nearly pure vim environment. Does this make me less of a vim user?

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#86

Post by wirrbel »

rat87 wrote: post #63

I feel like one of the main goals of neovim is to make it more like emacs. Or guile emacs. Instead of a shitty language for plugins and configuration: vimL (with some support for plugins in alternative languages but not well integrated and not present in all vim installations) and replace it with a good interface to a single language. Like emacs. Much of emacs is written in elisp instead of c, I wonder if this will e…

Both vim and emacs have had problems recently in balancing refactoring needs and their traditional architecture and project layout.

People are more and more used to contributing to projects with an occasional pull request. However to benefit from this, the projects have to become more accessible to these people. This makes all those changes that are introduced to neovim necessary. If tests are already beneficial for a developer who has written the codebase, the occassional contributor really depends on them.

Vim and emacs are projects that are of special strategical importance to the world. They must not vanish.

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#87

Post by astine »

chunkstuntman wrote: post #74
astine wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trivial counter-example: .some-css-rule { padding-left:50px; padding-right:50px; margin:50px; } Pretend you want to avoid changing the margin.

:s/50/60/g @: or even just /50 r6n. if there's any new feature I'd like to see in neovim it would be one key that will repeat an ex command like period does for normal/visual mode

You're first example wont work. What you want is

    :s/50/60/ @:
And that still won't handle

    .some-css-rule { margin:50px;  padding-left:50px; padding-right:50px; }
The second example will work, for this, but not for the situation where you change your mind halfway through and decide you want 70px instead.

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#88

Post by astine »

eckzow wrote: post #76
astine wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trivial counter-example: .some-css-rule { padding-left:50px; padding-right:50px; margin:50px; } Pretend you want to avoid changing the margin.

Glib response: :s/t:50/t:60/g More serious response: I think after many years of training ones brain to use the features available to it some of those features become second nature and subconscious. This is great for editing and it's the reason I immediately saw that you left me a really easy way to do it, but it can make seeing the value of new features more difficult.

How about this one:

    .some-css-rule { padding-left:50px; padding-right:50px; margin-left:50px; margin-right:50px; }
I run into examples like this a lot and have yet to find an elegant way to deal with it. Honestly, I'd like to see if there's a simple solution.

I find that I spend a lot of time in my editor crafting regular expressions to do clever replacements and I've yet to get so good at it that it doesn't distract me from my editing.

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#89

Post by gkya »

bdamm wrote: post #85
gkya wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [I] have a 1500 line vimrc and plenty of plugins (including my own), so you don't get to assume I don't grok the vim way of thinking :) This may only show that you grok VimScript way of thinking, not Vim way of thinking. You need not re-record a macro, a macro is stored in a register. Just edit the register, and you're good to go with you new, (supposedly) improved macro. In Vim, you edit in Normal mode, and insert…

My .vimrc used to be large, but now has dwindled down to a handful of simple commands. I've simply adapted to be maximally productive in a nearly pure vim environment. Does this make me less of a vim user?

It rather makes you more of a vim user. My vimrc file contains mostly leader mappings and option settings, added mostly with a craze of customising.

Re: Neovim's Next Feature Poll

#90

Post by indralukmana »

cube_yellow wrote: post #72
indralukmana wrote: post #44

So anyway, where is NeoEmacs? *i am going to run now.

"NeoEmacs" is guilemacs, putting emacs ontop of the guile vm. look at the GSoC project.

Oh, i just learn about this.

But when i search google for this guilemacs there are no definitive information for this project (as in where i download the program?).

So based on my little browsing, vim and emacs have some kind of different problems? (or are they even problems?)

Vim has the benevolent dictator who prefer supporting backwards compatibility to developing features. And Neovim try to address that.

Emacs is using a "hacky emacs lisp" and "guile emacs" tries to incorporate a scheme based improvement on the backend.

Post reply on HN