81–90 of 459 posts
Eh. Why is 1.0 out already? Keyboard layouts which use AltGr are still broken. E.g. I can't type '@', '\', and 'µ'. Yes, I can't write metadata annotations or escape some characters.
Perhaps such keyboards don't concern that many people?
The killer feature of Atom to me is the ease with which it can be extended (via packages) and the openness to community contribution on core features. That's not a knock against any other editor (some of which share similar characteristics in this regard) – it's just what draws me to Atom. It's super easy to hack on and contribute to.
Welcome to what I've felt with Emacs since I first used it. Might be time to work on some tutorials and examples to make Emacs easier to hack on and contribute to...
what's up with name reuse these days. atom (the syndication format) may be on the verge of becoming obsolete, but it's also forgotten and irrelevant already to warrant a name reuse?
(And: Is either of them actually true? There are still plenty of blogs around, and I thought quite a lot of them had Atom feeds.)
I still haven't given Atom a go. Is it worth switching from ST3?
No, it still fares very poorly when matched up against ST3 (or Textmate 2, or basically any high-quality native editor). It is slow slow slow, and has lots of little quirks which are clearly a result of the wacky way they decided to build a text editor. BUT .... it is way, way better than it used to be. I keep it installed and use it from time to time, to let it update itself and see how it has grown. It clearly has…
Running on a stock mid-2011 Air w/ 4GB Ram plus a Thunderbolt display. If it was slow, I would have switched or upgraded my machine sometime ago.
Things that are slow to me are waiting for node-sass to compile on save, server-side code reloading, npm installing... and so on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the Cycle of Bloat. 1. Develop tool. It's small and fast and minimal! Woo! 2. It's easy to modify because it's so small! Woo! 3. Look, there's a budding ecosystem of packages! Woo! (Let's not talk about the fact the packages exist precisely because the original product wasn't big enough.) 4. Oh dear, some of them conflict, a lot of them suck. Well, here's some winners, let's pull them into the core. Now the base…
There are projects like Linux Kernel, Mercurial, and Rails that have managed to be very extensible and have had good leadership in knowing what to put into core and what to cut from core as time goes on.
So for what it's worth, I'm very unconvinced that "bloat" is the automatically-bad thing that whoever is saying #6 says it is. There are things that are just crappy amalgamations of whatever, sure, but there are also a lot of big things that solve hard problems, and part of the implication of the cycle is that every time a #6 pops up and starts a new project, (s)he is inevitably beginning on a journey of discovery in which (s)he will discover why the previous tool got big. Big problems require big solutions. And it turns out that "text editing" looks really simple, and gets really not simple really fast. Same for the other two things.
I've literally lost count of the minimalistic text editors with great plugin interfaces that have paraded by me at this point.
(And... uh... how can I put this delicately... writing a good web framework is actually a non-trivial exercise. The web is complicated to do it right. If you've got a 250-line web "framework", odds are what you've got is 250 lines that sorta kinda work as long as nobody tries to hack it and nobody cares about actual compliance with all of the implicit and explicit standards embedded in HTTP. It may be suitable for your blog, it may be suitable for a 3-call API, but it's probably not suitable for anywhere near as many things as you'd like. And it's probably brutally insecure somehow.)
The killer feature of Atom to me is the ease with which it can be extended (via packages) and the openness to community contribution on core features. That's not a knock against any other editor (some of which share similar characteristics in this regard) – it's just what draws me to Atom. It's super easy to hack on and contribute to.
It's the Cycle of Bloat. 1. Develop tool. It's small and fast and minimal! Woo! 2. It's easy to modify because it's so small! Woo! 3. Look, there's a budding ecosystem of packages! Woo! (Let's not talk about the fact the packages exist precisely because the original product wasn't big enough.) 4. Oh dear, some of them conflict, a lot of them suck. Well, here's some winners, let's pull them into the core. Now the base…
First, whatever you don't use, it's not even loaded in memory.
Second, bloated is all about having tons of options you don't need or use. Not about adding stuff you DO need piecemeal.
Third, bloat is mostly a UI thing, not a "number of add-ons" or "too many lines of code" thing. Programs don't get slow because they are "bloated" with extra code (if it doesn't run, then it has 0 effect on their speed). They get slow because they are badly programmed (e.g. loading one big text file all at once in memory instead of having a paging system).
The availability of tens of thousands of packages hasn't made Emacs "bloated", much less Vim or ST. Or even installing those packages doesn't make those editors feel bloated.
Whereas something like Eclipse was bloated from the start -- because it was a very heavy design with tons of abstractions layers, ton of built-in options and visual clutter etc, created on a GCed language with frequent stops on larger codebases etc. That's even without any third party plugin added, just the Eclipse Java SE core packages.
Then I remember trying to give it a try once again a few months ago but gave up because I've heard so many horror story about performance issues.
Now I'm willing to give it yet another try because of vim-bindings and performance issue improvements. Is it at workable state?
I still haven't given Atom a go. Is it worth switching from ST3?
At least worth trying. I like atom a lot but it's still noticeably slower than ST3 on my late 2011 Macbook, even with SSD.
I remember when Atom beta came out I was turned off because it (presumably) didn't run on Windows(my workstation at the time). Then I remember trying to give it a try once again a few months ago but gave up because I've heard so many horror story about performance issues. Now I'm willing to give it yet another try because of vim-bindings and performance issue improvements. Is it at workable state?
I would say so. I've used it as my primary code editor for several months now and really enjoy it. Yeah occasionally you can tell it's a web app running on the desktop but only because opening projects or large files is kinda slow (also an occasional JavaScript error but I haven't seen those in a least two months) but beyond that it works very well. Very speeding on my MacBook and my HP Spectre.
The plugins are the best part and the primary reason I use it.
Eh. Why is 1.0 out already? Keyboard layouts which use AltGr are still broken. E.g. I can't type '@', '\', and 'µ'. Yes, I can't write metadata annotations or escape some characters.
> Eh. Why is 1.0 out already? Keyboard layouts which use AltGr are still broken. Perhaps such keyboards don't concern that many people?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AltGr_key
Also, this was supposed to be fixed in 1.0. I don't know why they decided to release 1.0 prematurely.