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

Atom 1.0

blog.atom.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 459 posts

Re: Atom 1.0

#311

Post by Kequc »

thiht wrote: post #163
steveklabnik wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is true, and I love JQuery, there's a significant number of JavaScript programmers who do say that JQuery is bloated and slow and old and you shouldn't use it. http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/ and all that. Even if it's not actually true (as you've said, it literally is not bloated wrt filesize) people still think it's true.

Your link explicitely says "you MIGHT not need jQuery", there's nothing wrong about that, quite often you actually don't need it at all. It doesn't say "never use jQuery"

I find jquery is a good rapid prototyping tool.

If you have limited time use it, but you'll spend more time later trying to remove it again. Building and then marketing a library that lists jquery as a dependency is somewhat of a blight these days, isn't it?

Re: Atom 1.0

#312

Post by tw04 »

octref wrote: post #26

Congrats! I started using Atom a year ago, but at that time it was very unstable and the performance sucks so I switched back to Vim. This 1.0 still has something to pine for: some of the essential packages are still not updated for the 1.0 API (vim-mode, etc), and when processing large files it still slows down significantly, but as they say, it's now a good foundation to build upon.

I get the impression that the large file issue isn't ever going to be fixed. Every time there's an update to Atom posted here on HN, and I ask about it, I get down voted into oblivion. It's a bummer too - I love the interface, I love the package, but the refusal to address opening large file makes it a non-starter for me. (No, I don't want to have two separate workflows for reviewing log files and writing code).

Re: Atom 1.0

#313

Post by arikrak »

bdcravens wrote: post #306

Congrats to the team for reaching this important milestone. I'm a Sublime license holder, but I use Atom as much as I can, because the more open source can win, the better. However, yesterday I was doing some complex regex's (porting a random sql dump file into a seeds.rb), and Atom kept dying, whereas Sublime was pretty much instantaneous. I'm not doing the usual "Atom is slow" drum beating, but saying some underton…

I know it's off-topic, but is regex the best way to convert SQL into seeds.rb? I'm thinking of doing the same thing, but I figured I'd use Ruby or a gem. https://github.com/rroblak/seed_dump

Re: Atom 1.0

#314

Post by bdcravens »

arikrak wrote: post #313
bdcravens wrote: post #306

Congrats to the team for reaching this important milestone. I'm a Sublime license holder, but I use Atom as much as I can, because the more open source can win, the better. However, yesterday I was doing some complex regex's (porting a random sql dump file into a seeds.rb), and Atom kept dying, whereas Sublime was pretty much instantaneous. I'm not doing the usual "Atom is slow" drum beating, but saying some underton…

I know it's off-topic, but is regex the best way to convert SQL into seeds.rb? I'm thinking of doing the same thing, but I figured I'd use Ruby or a gem. https://github.com/rroblak/seed_dump

This was a data dump from a previous development effort, and the Rails app was no longer connected to that database. Moreover, it was MySQL, not Postgresql, the new target. I probably could have stood up MySQL and used that gem to achieve the same result, but honestly, while the regex is at times a bit complex, it's straight-forward, since an insert's parenthetical list of values is very close to what you pass to Model.create. Thanks for the gem recommendation though, and hopefully it'll be a better solution the next time I encounter a similar situation.

Re: Atom 1.0

#315

Post by baudehlo »

eric_h wrote: post #139
lojack wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, you can write your own packages in vanilla JS. Unfortunately though all of the documentation (and most packages themselves) are all written in coffeescript. Basically, the only way you can write a plugin in Javascript is if you already know Coffeescript (at least enough to read it). It's just one extra barrier of entry for non-coffeescript developers. I personally thought about writing a simple plugin, went to…

I wouldn't even classify CoffeeScript as another language. It's really just javascript with some syntactical sugar. It took me about 20 mins to get comfortable with it.

It's a lot of syntactic sugar and things removed. Even the ?: operator which I use a lot. Typing "a = if b then c else d" is a huge wasted opportunity to just keep the ?: op. Plus there's no way to get the == operator even if you know you want it and understand the nuances.

Re: Atom 1.0

#316

Post by bitmapbrother »

The absolute disregard for any thanks for the Chromium team in the announcement is disgusting and a slap in the face to the foundation this editor is based on.

Re: Atom 1.0

#317

Post by rev_bird »

gjm11 wrote: post #83
LoSboccacc wrote: post #3

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?

Do you mean that syndication is on the verge of becoming obsolete, or that Atom specifically is on the verge of becoming obsolete? (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.)

Personally, I really miss the "heyday" of the RSS reader. That was a great way to consume content.

Re: Atom 1.0

#318

Post by eric_h »

baudehlo wrote: post #315
eric_h wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't even classify CoffeeScript as another language. It's really just javascript with some syntactical sugar. It took me about 20 mins to get comfortable with it.

It's a lot of syntactic sugar and things removed. Even the ?: operator which I use a lot. Typing "a = if b then c else d" is a huge wasted opportunity to just keep the ?: op. Plus there's no way to get the == operator even if you know you want it and understand the nuances.

I honestly find I use the ? operator in coffeescript far, far more often than I want to use a ternary conditional.

Fair enough on the == operator, but it's another that I have honestly never needed or wanted.

Re: Atom 1.0

#319

Post by logn »

With the following Atom community packages, I basically have a Rust IDE: linter, linter-rust, build, language-rust, racer

Re: Atom 1.0

#320

Post by thedaniel »

Mahn wrote: post #56

I really want to like Atom but it's such a pity that they went for CoffeeScript instead of plain ES5/ES6.

We've been working on Atom for a long time. I think that CS was a great choice when it was made some years ago, and I can say that the core team quite likes ES6 (which directly addresses a lot of the same JS warts that CS was designed to avoid). That said even if we decided to move to ES6 today, it's a big ship and it takes a long time to turn :)
Post reply on HN