May a 'gatekeeper' give me a nod in the right direction
GNU nano is my editor of choice
101–110 of 236 posts
Re: GNU nano is my editor of choice
#102So I have a question and I'd like to understand if possible. To me programming isn't text editing. Granted, we use text to write most code outside of say Pike but effectively most programming is working with symbols right? Like .subst is meaningless as an operation on a string but .substring(0, 1) is meaningful. So I don't really get the advantage of such, to my mind, rudimentary text editors. At a minimum surely bei…
> I can see that there's not much difference between an ide and editor for new languages but why do people prefer text editing and prioritize typing speed where IDEs exist? That's not why I use a text editor (Geany most often). I find the IDE to be complex and to bring on complexity. If I'm using a text editor the project has to remain simple. The best analogy I have was when I used Slackware. Ubuntu users would laug…
> I'm sure I would use an IDE if I were a Dilbert-style enterprise Java developer. The enterprise thing took all the fun out of programming so I took my career in a different direction.
I think this is the crux of my fear here. Like I don't really enjoy the jobs I've had because they tend to be that kind of environment. I'd compare it to being a logger whose sole job is to saw lots of logs quickly. Using a handsaw just seems barmy but you would probably use one when building a jewellery box. I guess Unix type architecture and design encourages jewellery boxes over lots of planks quickly.
Re: GNU nano is my editor of choice
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
The advantage is you don't become dependent on an IDE. Ever seen someone who can't write anything without all the IDE aids to fill in code for them?
when do you ever not have one? work isn’t like camping or something. you always have your computer
When using a language without an IDE. In a shell. At home.
Re: GNU nano is my editor of choice
#104The thesis of this post is roughly that nano, when configured, is enough of an editor for the author. Which is totally fine! People should be happy with their tools and not feel pressured by popularity to use what others use (vim, emacs being prime competitors in this case). Alas, nano (and pico before it) have a certain stigma among more "experienced" Unix users that more or less boils down to gatekeeping and snobbe…
Quoted post unavailable.
Jumping to line numbers can be done with mouse.
Refactoring and search/replace can be either sed or grep and copy/paste.
Filtering text through a command can be done in your shell.
Nano has syntax highlighting.
Importing from a file is copy and paste.
Not sure when you really need column numbers.
Split pane editing is tmux or multiple windows.
Now I'll take my customized and plugin-full neovim setup over that any day, but that does not mean a developer cannot be fully competent with nano. I've worked with large projects where I didn't have access to neovim or my setup and just zsh and vi were enough to get the job done. Having to use nano would have been more of an inconvenience but it would have not been in any way undoable. Understandably, a dev would be more productive with their preferred setup, but if a dev couldn't work without it, that would be a red flag.
Re: GNU nano is my editor of choice
#105The thesis of this post is roughly that nano, when configured, is enough of an editor for the author. Which is totally fine! People should be happy with their tools and not feel pressured by popularity to use what others use (vim, emacs being prime competitors in this case). Alas, nano (and pico before it) have a certain stigma among more "experienced" Unix users that more or less boils down to gatekeeping and snobbe…
The thing about that “snobbery and gate keeping” is that it’s not at all that. Maybe not everyone’s experience mimics mine but I felt like people looked down at me a bit when I was 16 for using nano on the command line. But, and here’s the kicker, if I hadnt been pushed into vim I would not be nearly as productive now. There have been countless times in my career as a sysadmin/devops/SRE where I’ve been stuck with ho…
It also depends what you use an editor for. Back when was doing more programming, I used something more powerful for the DOS environment--yes this was a while back.
I tend to use nano because I'm mostly making changes to config files and the like so I mostly want simple.
Re: GNU nano is my editor of choice
#106there are far worse choices. for quick stuff, i either emacs -q or nano more or less interchangably, and in my larval stage i lived in nano (and pine!) for many years happily enough. These days, i find that my movement key memory will betray me in nano at the worst time(s), so i tend to stick with emacs -q -nw for light-and-fast stuff, but when that's annoying to obtain, i'll happily fall back and think more carefull…
emacs --daemon Then connect with emacsclient. You can also name the daemon which lets you have specific configurations for specific tasks. At that point, launching emacs for quick stuff is very fast.
oh, i know. sometimes i want barebones as well.
Re: GNU nano is my editor of choice
#107The thesis of this post is roughly that nano, when configured, is enough of an editor for the author. Which is totally fine! People should be happy with their tools and not feel pressured by popularity to use what others use (vim, emacs being prime competitors in this case). Alas, nano (and pico before it) have a certain stigma among more "experienced" Unix users that more or less boils down to gatekeeping and snobbe…
It’s not really gatekeeping or snobbery to say that knowing vim is more useful simply because I can log into any Linux machine on the planet and edit a text file without having to install an editor.
I've never worked with distros targeting enterprise, but I've never encountered a distro that didn't include nano.
Even if Vim is "better", I think it's important for all distros to include a text editor that is easy to use out of the box, and nano fits that bill perfectly.
Re: GNU nano is my editor of choice
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's not gatekeeping, > you bet I will judge your ability to code by your preference of editor, FYI. That's called 'gatekeeping.'
It's kind of a misnomer then, isn't it? He's not preventing anybody from doing anything, just forming a preconception based on what I think a lot of people would agree is sound logic: That on average, people whose first instinct is `nano` to edit a file in Linux have less experience than people whose first instinct is `vi(m)` (or, selfishly `emacs`).
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gatekeeping
> When someone uses a hobby or interest as a means of elevating themselves above others to give oneself a sense of being superior transforming their passion or knowledge about a particular subject into an ugly tool of self-inflation.
The shoe fits.
First editor I used was vi/vim.
For years it was the only editor I could use. (My CS education and school server use predates Pine/Pico/Nano and later on, it was a long time before nano was an option on more restrictive/specialized machines)
I still prefer nano.
In the end, I don't give a fuck what you use as long as you can get the job done.
Passing judgement on what people prefer to use is the de-facto definition of 'gatekeeping.'
Re: GNU nano is my editor of choice
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
this is less true these days w/ slim docker images that don't include any editors by default
Doesn’t POSIX designate vi as a requirement? https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6880751
Not sure, but I've logged into many terminals before and not one of them didn't have vi installed. Have found plenty without nano or vim though.
Re: GNU nano is my editor of choice
#110The thesis of this post is roughly that nano, when configured, is enough of an editor for the author. Which is totally fine! People should be happy with their tools and not feel pressured by popularity to use what others use (vim, emacs being prime competitors in this case). Alas, nano (and pico before it) have a certain stigma among more "experienced" Unix users that more or less boils down to gatekeeping and snobbe…
I too was bullied from nano onto vi/vim. I still dont think I 'get it' but the brainwashing is complete, I cant even type the word nano into a terminal.
I too applaud the author for their bravery in coming out as a proud nano user, not that there is anything wrong with it.