Live data from Hacker News

Helix Editor 25.07

helix-editor.com

161–167 of 167 posts

Re: Helix Editor 25.07

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have muscle memory of Vim. I respect the preferences of others but I think that most people overfit for muscle memory. I've switched OSes/editors/IDEs many times in my career. Every time, the first day or two I feel like "This is the worst fucking thing ever, I can't even type God damn it I want to set the computer on fire and become a farmer." But... that passes. After a couple of days, I have new muscle memory…

But there is only so much room for muscle memory or context to switch between. I tried Helix for a while, got used to it and I really liked it, especially the noun verb order being different from vim. Seeing what you have selected before performing the action. But for me the problem is that vim is everywhere I go or will eventually end up. All my servers have vim. Every server I need to randomly debug has vim or vi.…

i cold turkey switched to colemak. i can go between that and qwerty. i went from t9 to full thumb typing. i use 5 different keyboards (with different custom layouts) daily.

the human brain can do all this and more if you let it and deal with a small amount of lag in building the neurons up

Re: Helix Editor 25.07

#162
post #154
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, its model is that you make a selection and then act on it. After the action happens there's nothing selected. The editor can't infer your intent in making the selection, so there's no reasonable notion of repeating the last edit. You can separately repeat the last motion or last action, but not the whole edit---which of course isn't as useful. Helix would _ideally_ like you to tell it ahead-of-time everywhere yo…

In that situation, what I do is essentially save a macro (recording the selection and the edit) with `Q` and then `q` becomes my equivalent to `.`

Good note; there's almost always a (somewhat less convenient) workaround. I find the visual feedback that induces these compromises actively annoying, so don't want to give up anything for it. Different strokes, of course!

Re: Helix Editor 25.07

#164
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it really does come down to taste. I learned how to do modal text editing. I believe it is a fine and efficient way to edit. So is non-modal. So is mouse editing. I still prefer the emacs way of doing things

> I still prefer the emacs way of doing things Emacs was always modal. Emacs is inherently a modal text editor - keychords are modal, transients are modal, isearch is modal, repeat-mode is modality. The only thing the idea of vim-navigation brings on top of all that is a simple, structured and memorable language/grammar to deal with modality, that's all what it is. Both approaches are modal; Vi just codified its moda…

> The best thing about learning that language is that you can apply it anywhere where keyboard input is still relevant - your browser, your terminal, your entire system - e.g. you can control your music, jump between apps, navigate between windows, etc. using only the home row keys.

I guess maybe with some configuration? A lot of emacs keybindings work out of the box in most text boxes I can think of, including this one I'm typing into right now.

If the justification about VI is that it's more learnable, then that's hardly a reason for me to switch - I've already learned emacs.

Although I do think it's a stretch to call it "immediately graspable"

Re: Helix Editor 25.07

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I still prefer the emacs way of doing things Emacs was always modal. Emacs is inherently a modal text editor - keychords are modal, transients are modal, isearch is modal, repeat-mode is modality. The only thing the idea of vim-navigation brings on top of all that is a simple, structured and memorable language/grammar to deal with modality, that's all what it is. Both approaches are modal; Vi just codified its moda…

> The best thing about learning that language is that you can apply it anywhere where keyboard input is still relevant - your browser, your terminal, your entire system - e.g. you can control your music, jump between apps, navigate between windows, etc. using only the home row keys. I guess maybe with some configuration? A lot of emacs keybindings work out of the box in most text boxes I can think of, including this…

> that's hardly a reason for me to switch - I've already learned emacs.

Most people think of keyboard input as a linear, one-dimensional approach to text editing, that's what you're doing here. Vim-style navigation offers something fundamentally different - a spatial "language" that maps directly to how we conceptualize our workspace.

Consider window management in vanilla Emacs:

- C-x 2 splits horizontally (mnemonic: "two windows")

- C-x 3 splits vertically (less intuitive—why 3?)

- C-x 4 becomes a prefix for file operations in other windows

The logic breaks down quickly. There's no consistent mental model connecting these commands. C-x 4 abandons the splitting metaphor entirely, becoming a namespace for "other window" operations rather than a window count.

Doom Emacs's vim-inspired approach creates a coherent spatial language:

- SPC w s - split

- SPC w v - vertical split

- SPC w h/j/k/l - jump left/down/up/right

The hjkl directional keys mirror vim's movement commands, creating a consistent spatial metaphor. Your fingers learn to "think" in terms of physical direction rather than arbitrary key combinations.

This spatial approach transforms window management from memorizing disconnected shortcuts into developing spatial intuition. Instead of thinking "what was that split command again?", you think "I want to move right" and your fingers naturally press 'h'. The keybindings become an extension of spatial reasoning rather than abstract symbol manipulation.

This principle extends beyond window management - vim's entire philosophy treats text editing as navigation through dimensional space, making complex operations feel natural and memorable.

And like I said, this model can easily be extended beyond just the text editor - you can navigate things in your browser, terminal, etc. Why would I even try to learn and memorize new keyboard shortcuts e.g., every time I install a new music player? I can control volume with j/k and previous/next song with h/l in any music player.

> I do think it's a stretch to call it "immediately graspable"

But it is though. It is very simple grammar. Anyone who's not mentally deficient can understand and learn it quickly. Building the muscle memory takes time, yes, but the idea itself is absolutely graspable. I remember, I hated myself for about a week. After that, my keyboard life was never the same.

Re: Helix Editor 25.07

#166
post #22

Very sad that Helix still doesn't have Sublime-like multi-caret support. All I want is to Ctrl + Click and Shift + Alt + Arrows.

Multi-caret support in Helix is awesome. It’s even the first feature they mention on the homepage. https://helix-editor.com You can `C` to extend the caret down, or `s` to enter a multiple regex selection. It even keeps your copied/deleted text per caret. I do wild things with it all the time, like changing a structured document into a completely different structure.

What is the equivalent of Sublime's Ctrl + D? Double-clicking to select something, then Ctrl + D to select all instances of that something, while creating multi carets on each.

Re: Helix Editor 25.07

#167
post #76
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is the forum post that convinced me NOT to continue getting into Helix. It says all I need about the project health. And given the development since then, I am more confident that it’s a bad horse to bet on. https://github.com/helix-editor/helix/issues/1840#issuecomme...

I don't see the problem. It's a great result: (paraphrasing) "people arguing about whether code folding is useful or not is pointless. we're going to do it eventually but not right now." What's wrong with that?

In therapy, I love the thought experiment of "What could he have said instead?" and WHY did he choose THIS exact phrasing, out of the millions of approaches he could have chosen?

Say that he is concerned about the time required for the project and only wants to safeguard the project. The post could convey the exact same message like this:

--- Alternative fictional answer by maintainer--- Confirming that code folding is a planned feature. It's a high-impact addition, but the implementation is non-trivial and requires careful design. The primary blocker is technical: our current buffer and positioning logic (see src/core/text_object.rs). A correct implementation requires a significant refactor of how we map logical buffer lines to visual screen positions.

Because core dev time is focused on xxx, a community-led effort is the most realistic path forward for this feature. I can provide review and guidance, but won't have the bandwidth to drive the implementation myself in the near term. If anybody want to contribute, Analyze the groundwork in PR #6417.

I'm keeping this issue open for high-level implementation strategies. Please take detailed design proposals to a new thread in Discussions to keep this focused. Off-topic comments will be removed. --- end of fictional answer ---

Basically, it all comes down to the vibe each response gives off. The real post is a classic "Do Not Enter" sign. The maintainer acts like the only one with the keys, essentially saying, "This is too hard for you, so don't even bother." It shuts the door on anyone who might want to help, which means the project is stuck waiting for that one person to have free time.

My rewritten version is more like leaving the door open for other smart people. The attitude is, "Look, this is a tricky problem and I'm swamped. If you're up for a real challenge, here’s the map to get started." It respects other developers' skills and invites them to be part of the solution.

I think the key to a great open-source project is that you have to actively build a team you can trust. You do that by giving people a real chance to contribute, learn the hard stuff, and eventually share the load. That's the only way a project grows beyond a one-person show and actually sticks around for the long haul.

Post reply on HN