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

Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

limetext.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 251 posts

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#231

Post by actf »

beefsack wrote: post #2

Lime has been around for a little while now, it seems to have a fairly functional backend but still awaiting a high quality frontend implementation. Part of what sets ST apart is the frontend. One of the most impressive goals on the roadmap is to implement a terminal frontend as well as a QT frontend, which I'm quite excited to see. Arch users can install Lime from AUR: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lime-git/

> One of the most impressive goals on the roadmap is to implement a terminal frontend as well as a QT frontend, which I'm quite excited to see.

I'm also interested to see this. I've said before that I think Go could be a really interesting language to develop GUI software in, however the existing QML package is "alpha quality". I've considered writing GUI software in Go, but at this point I think it would be a mistake given that most, if not all, GUI bindings in Go (and please correct me if I'm wrong) are considered experimental or alpha quality. In theory this will mean the author's progress will be somewhat dependent on the go-qml project, and may involve fixing bugs upstream.

If it were me, I would probably choose another language just based on the maturity of Go's current GUI bindings.

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#232

Post by smt88 »

dhruvbhatia wrote: post #21
smt88 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sublime is dead. No one is actively developing it. There's a rich history of piggybacking on dead software, and I (and many others) clicked this link because of that piggybacking. I completely support and admire someone who is trying to further the development of Sublime without having the original code base.

> Sublime is dead. No one is actively developing it. This isn't correct, at least according to the author. This was posted in the ST forum on Mar. 18, 2014 [1]: "From the Sublime office: We are not selling to Github, we are not stopping development of Sublime. As noted by another poster, this is effectively a one man band (I'm here to answer sales questions, process your refunds and get the mail so Jon doesn't have t…

Sublime Text 3 Beta was announced in January of 2013. It's safe to call it vaporware at this point.

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#233

Post by smt88 »

coldtea wrote: post #39
smt88 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sublime is dead. No one is actively developing it. There's a rich history of piggybacking on dead software, and I (and many others) clicked this link because of that piggybacking. I completely support and admire someone who is trying to further the development of Sublime without having the original code base.

> Sublime is dead. No one is actively developing it. No one has to "actively develop it". It's a fully capable editor. It has a great plugin framework and ecosystem. Pending some incompatible OS change, I can use it for the next 30 years (using ST-3 from the early alphas, and it has been rock solid). For comparison, I also use Vim, and it's not like I use any "new features" in Vim or anything. The most "current" feat…

Updating your editor, adding plugins, or changing to a new editor is never an issue of "fully capable" or "good enough". It's always whether there are new ways to save time.

Lots of people thought editors were "fully capable" before the "go-to any symbol" functionality was introduced (possibly by Sublime). Now they can't live without it.

But besides all that, Sublime has lots of bugs that impact daily work. If it were in bug-fix mode, where plugins were adding new features, that would be fine. That's not the case.

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#234

Post by smt88 »

wldcordeiro wrote: post #203
wooter wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no, but emacs and vim don't charge 60 bucks per version. I'm not saying this is necessarily negative for ST, but its the point he was making. I frankly think 60 bucks is worth robust support which ST certainly did not have. Anyways, theres no satisfying HN. When Atom came out, the consensus was that they should've come out and said it was an ST clone upfront. Now someone does that and it seems the tide has changed. W…

I don't think Atom is ready to replace Sublime yet for me. The way it renders text just bugs me for one. The other thing is that it's lacking a good way to do syntax specific settings like in Sublime. Aside from that it's a matter of the plugin ecosystem not being as mature.

Atom is awesome, but I agree that the plugins aren't mature enough yet.

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#235

Post by smt88 »

oridecon wrote: post #112
softinio wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of interest what did you move to?

PhpStorm (jetbrains.com/phpstorm), but it's not open source :( there are lot of free options too, like NetBeans

Netbeans is fantastic for PHP editing, except the go-to-anything functionality is terrible out of the box. Even after configuring, it's not as good as ST. Other than that, it's excellent.

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#236

Post by overgard »

cloverich wrote: post #187
overgard wrote: post #110

I wish they wouldn't attach themselves to the sublime brand. It's not theirs, and it's pretty shady to ride another project's coattails when their intent is essentially to cannibalize it by being sublime-but-free. You can discuss the merits of open source and paying for tools all you want, but basically their goal is to put a man out of business who's made something that a lot of people love, because he has the gall…

> I wish they wouldn't attach themselves to the sublime brand. It's not theirs Its competition. Thats the market segment they are aiming to attract and serve. They aren't claiming to be Sublime Text, they are claiming they want to be better than it. Its the market leader in that area, and if that is the segment they are interested in serving, imho it wouldn't make sense to not compare themselves to Sublime Text. > Al…

> They aren't claiming to be Sublime Text, they are claiming they want to be better than it

Sure, but, they're using sublime text's brand to draw attention to their own project. If they called themselves, say, "Cherry edit" and just had a comparison matrix to sublime text without saying "we want to be sublime", I bet this wouldn't have made it to the front page. They're piggybacking off the other projects success by invoking its name and lineage, while positioning themselves as a competitor by undercutting the price (in this case: free).

That's what I mean. It's not illegal or whatever, it just feels like poor sportsmanship.

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#237

Post by qu4z-2 »

Diamons wrote: post #171
k__ wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$0 is not a bad price for something that will always be behind of Sublime's curve. I used closed and open source software. It just feels much better if I see a bug, fix it, place a pull request and be done with it, than discuss with some devs in a bug tracker if and when they want to fix a bug I hate.

And that's the problem. Every single open source software looks like it was cobbled together with no vision or coherency in design. It's no surprise that most open source software is clunky and hard to use whereas closed products always have that visual polish.

    Closed products always have that visual polish
Wow. You must use different closed-source software to me. I agree a lot of open source software is very ad-hoc and seems to have no overarching design in place, but the same seems to be true of most closed source software in my experience.

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#238

Post by kbenson »

colomon wrote: post #76
nicholassmith wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No one has to "actively develop it". It's a fully capable editor." People seem to forget this quite quickly, but what else is needed in ST3 right now ? Very little in my day-to-day experience that isn't either solved via a plugin, or mostly trivial. I'd prefer a much more stable piece of software rather than one that's having upgrades thrown at it every month to maintain an 'actively developed' project status.

I'm still using TextMate 1 for pretty much this reason. :) The only features I'd really love to add to TextMate are the rmate remote launching feature (which didn't work for me when I tried TextMate 2 a couple of months ago) and syntax highlighting for Perl 6 (which as far as I know no editor has yet).

> syntax highlighting for Perl 6 (which as far as I know no editor has yet).

You mean, besides standard vim 7.3? Also, here's[1] an emacs mode.

1: https://github.com/lue/p6mode

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#239

Post by grrowl »

Aldo_MX wrote: post #211
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it does include free updates. At least, I just copied my code from v2 into v3 and that worked.

Expiration Date Licenses purchased for Sublime Text 3 do not expire, however an upgrade fee will be required for Sublime Text 4. From: http://www.sublimetext.com/sales_faq

What the hell? Sublime Text 3 isn't even out of beta, nor featured on the Sublime Text homepage.

Re: Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone

#240

Post by bulte-rs »

Huppie wrote: post #167
bulte-rs wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know the distinction between the two ;-) While my boss charges something like EUR100 an hour, I make less than 25% of that (after taxes). O.t.o.h.: The salary is quite competitive around here (41k EUR a year, 40hrs/wk, 25 days off)

From your profile it looks like you're in The Netherlands. 41k/year is acceptable but not considered competitive in my book. Edit: Note that this 41k/year pretax salary in The Netherlands does not include the contributions your employer makes for you to your social security/pension/disability insurance, etc. That being said, even after all those it's not yet near 60 bucks an hour.

Exactly, I cost my employer approximately double of that. And you're right about it not being industry competitive; I should have been more specific about regionality (i.e. I choose to not work in Amsterdam where I can 'easily' make double but which will cost me around 2,5hrs of travel a day while I can walk to work in 5 minutes now).
Post reply on HN