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

301–310 of 459 posts

Re: Atom 1.0

#301

Post by webwanderings »

harperlee wrote: post #192

Wow... just downloaded the windows installer version and it autoinstalled itself wherever it chose fit, without questioning, it installed shortcuts on the start menu, placed itself on an already bloated contextual menu on several file extensions as an Open option, instead on "Open with...", etc. I usually install software on my user folder on the work laptop, as I don't have enough priviledges. This time the installe…

I clicked the download button and noticed 70+ MB file. I thought to myself, why in the world a text editor needs to be so huge. And then I see your comment. I clicked on the Pause button on my download.

Re: Atom 1.0

#302

Post by rwallace »

harperlee wrote: post #192

Wow... just downloaded the windows installer version and it autoinstalled itself wherever it chose fit, without questioning, it installed shortcuts on the start menu, placed itself on an already bloated contextual menu on several file extensions as an Open option, instead on "Open with...", etc. I usually install software on my user folder on the work laptop, as I don't have enough priviledges. This time the installe…

Personally I think there is something to be said for skipping irrelevant questions. I don't care where a program installs to, I just want it to work. I want the developers to deal with that kind of detail so I don't have to worry about it.

Re: Atom 1.0

#303

Post by baudehlo »

jbenner-radham wrote: post #256
oblio wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Text editing is not simple. Not since Unicode is a thing. And it's not because of Unicode, it's because of us humans and our crazy languages.

Totally agree with you there. I've been reading over the Unicode spec and some of it makes my head spin. I would have never imagined the required level of complexity beforehand.

And the language Atom is written in supports Unicode very badly indeed, to keep things relevant to the topic at hand.

Re: Atom 1.0

#305

Post by chris-at »

erokar wrote: post #126
Mahn wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but it's not the same, on one side I'd like to read the core and hack it on my own terms, on the other I'd feel more comfortable writing packages if I could just read the core and see how things work under the hood. I'd like it to be a "hackable editor" as it touts itself, but as it stands right now it's a "hackable editor if you are comfortable with CoffeeScript".

It will take you less than a day to learn to read CoffeeScript if you are familiar with JS.

Coffeescript is a very polarizing language. Most people appear to either love it or hate it vigorously.

https://discuss.atom.io/t/why-coffeescript/131

Re: Atom 1.0

#306

Post by bdcravens »

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 undertones of the announcement make me worry a bit. I hear discussion of things like Electron and "social coding" as the future, and I'm hoping that means that no one considers 1.0 to equate to the core editing experience being finished. It's not, and I hope the Atom team continues to iterate before moving on to new features.

Being able to open files larger than 2MB isn't sexy, but it's necessary. Having to hard-kill my editor because the save dialog is trapped on my other full screen session that it won't let me get to deserves more than a "but it's open source" response.

tl;dr congrats team and your core users want the best editor possible over bells and whistles

Re: Atom 1.0

#307

Post by cdcarter »

ben336 wrote: post #238
shadowmint wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UI library is in coffee script; if you want use a UI for your plugin, youre pretty much stuck using it. (..and yes, its technically possible to do with plain js, but I challenge any of the 'but just use js' folk to link to a popular plugin, with a UI, that does)

You can call CoffeeScript functions from JavaScript and vice versa. There's no reason that you can't use the UI library from code written in JS. The fact that its written in CoffeeScript is an implementation detail

But all the docs are in Coffeescript, and it's quite hostile to a new dev.

Re: Atom 1.0

#308

Post by keehun »

rwallace wrote: post #302
harperlee wrote: post #192

Wow... just downloaded the windows installer version and it autoinstalled itself wherever it chose fit, without questioning, it installed shortcuts on the start menu, placed itself on an already bloated contextual menu on several file extensions as an Open option, instead on "Open with...", etc. I usually install software on my user folder on the work laptop, as I don't have enough priviledges. This time the installe…

Personally I think there is something to be said for skipping irrelevant questions. I don't care where a program installs to, I just want it to work. I want the developers to deal with that kind of detail so I don't have to worry about it.

See, for many, that is not an irrelevant question. Could be very important if you have multiple partitions/network drives specific for different purposes.

Re: Atom 1.0

#309

Post by MozMorris »

lvillani wrote: post #125
MozMorris wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry be that guy who posts his specs and disagrees... :-) 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.

It highly depends on your usage pattern. I usually have one long-lived instance of an editor for the project/thing I'm focusing on, but I also frequently fire up "temporary" instances for one-off editing jobs, from the terminal. The difference between, let's say, "subl ." (launch Sublime Text in the current directory) and "atom ." is staggering: Sublime Text starts instantly with a boatload of plugins; Atom starts ne…

Yup, that is totally where it is slow. Would be great if they could nail that.

I must be more tolerable to that startup time, perhaps I've even become used to it.

Re: Atom 1.0

#310

Post by tw04 »

Brakenshire wrote: post #133
laichzeit0 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this is crazy. I regularly work with log files in the 100mb to 300mb range which open perfectly fine in Vim/Sublime. If I had to invest time in learning Atom I'd have to multitask between editors for certain use-cases. Maybe if they could switch to a light-weight read-only type of text "viewer" for large files, that would even work. But I really do need to open big files on a weekly basis.

Do you really want to open log files in a code editor? It's not unreasonable to say that these are two different classes of programs, with different basic requirements.

I've been opening log files in either vi, notepad++, or sublime text for as long as I can remember. I've never had any issues accomplishing exactly what I needed. You insinuate that's a bad thing without providing any examples or solutions that are "better", so I can only assume your rationale is: My tool is awesome even though it doesn't fit your requirements, so you should change your requirements.
Post reply on HN