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

We need more zero config tools

arne.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 74 posts

Re: We need more zero config tools

#41

Post by sharperguy »

mattlondon wrote: post #4

I know this will be unpopular but I try to live a zero-config life. I just live with the defaults 99% of the time. I prefer not to be beholden to some special keyboard map or shell config or that essential plugin that does something very niche that you could simply not live without any more , because what if you do need to live without it? If you ever change machine or do pair programming or whatever where you are no…

or just ask them to install nix and temporarily import your entire setup to their machine

Re: We need more zero config tools

#42

Post by kunley »

exe34 wrote: post #36
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak to specifics of tmux/screen but, generally, one approach to this problem is to pick tools with the defaults you want. If a tool doesn't have good defaults, pick one that does. Sure, you have to be pragmatic about this—if no tool has good defaults, just pick the one with the best (and the best support for configuration...)

that's a very wild take - pick tools based on the key bindings instead of the features you actually need....

Yeah exactly, in the said example, tmux survived because it had better features - who uses screen today? The key bindings confusion was a fixable annoyance. We weight pros and cons quite often and not necessarily based on a default configuration

Re: We need more zero config tools

#43

Post by eviks »

mattlondon wrote: post #4

I know this will be unpopular but I try to live a zero-config life. I just live with the defaults 99% of the time. I prefer not to be beholden to some special keyboard map or shell config or that essential plugin that does something very niche that you could simply not live without any more , because what if you do need to live without it? If you ever change machine or do pair programming or whatever where you are no…

> Spend that mental energy and time on something else and get stuff done.

You'll waste mental energy on getting stuff done in worse conditions, in some cases even with a long-term risk to your health. All for a made up risk of

> you are essentially a frustrated jibbering wreck ... or your "essential" key bindings are not there

Nope, humans can hold multiple key bindings in their head.

So better invest some of that waste upfront and make your future self comfortable 99% of the time when you don't do pair programming or whatever

Re: We need more zero config tools

#44

Post by nox101 »

mattlondon wrote: post #4

I know this will be unpopular but I try to live a zero-config life. I just live with the defaults 99% of the time. I prefer not to be beholden to some special keyboard map or shell config or that essential plugin that does something very niche that you could simply not live without any more , because what if you do need to live without it? If you ever change machine or do pair programming or whatever where you are no…

the logic here doesn't work for me.

Don't use vi/emacs because someday I might only have nano/notepad

Don't use a computer because someday I might not have one

Don't use a refrigerator because sometime I might not have one.

Don't use a washing machine because someday I might not have one.

Don't use toilet because someday I might not have one

Don't use a shower because someday I might not have one.

Configs can be a 10x speed boost. The time spent getting familiar with a machine without, at least for me, is rare enough I can live with the few minutes of frustration. Otherwise, my configs are backed up so I can update the new machine to my preferences.

Re: We need more zero config tools

#45

Post by cjk »

Zababa wrote: post #28
cjk wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try to do this as well, with the notable exceptions of neovim, zsh, and tmux. My zsh configuration, despite being quite large, has never broken in strange and hilarious ways when adopting a new version of zsh. The opposite is true for neovim, and to a lesser degree, tmux. Nearly every time I install a neovim update, something breaks (often LSP-related). The devs don't seem to give a rat's ass about backwards compat…

Maybe you've already heard about it but Helix ( https://helix-editor.com/ ) mostly just works out of the box.

Yep -- saw that listed in the linked article. I'm going to give it a shot, but this bit of the article gives me pause:

> I will say that it takes some getting used to as it folows the selection -> action model, i.e. you need to run wd instead of dw to delete the next word.

It'll take...a lot of effort for me to break that habit.

Re: We need more zero config tools

#46

Post by eviks »

Charitably, yes: great defaults are indeed great, and we do need more tools to drop the unergonomic awfulness of the defaults made up decades ago.

But literally, no: it's practically impossible for a very wide variety of tools to have great defaults.

Case in point - that you have zero config in fish and helix is just you, there are also people who have plenty of OMF plugins or use a totally different keybinding scheme, so hundreds of lines of config

Re: We need more zero config tools

#47

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

exe34 wrote: post #36
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak to specifics of tmux/screen but, generally, one approach to this problem is to pick tools with the defaults you want. If a tool doesn't have good defaults, pick one that does. Sure, you have to be pragmatic about this—if no tool has good defaults, just pick the one with the best (and the best support for configuration...)

that's a very wild take - pick tools based on the key bindings instead of the features you actually need....

Well, it obviously depends on which tools you're talking about. For some types—terminal emulators, text editors—there are so many choices with near-identical feature sets that this approach can make sense.

Re: We need more zero config tools

#48

Post by zokier »

mattlondon wrote: post #4

I know this will be unpopular but I try to live a zero-config life. I just live with the defaults 99% of the time. I prefer not to be beholden to some special keyboard map or shell config or that essential plugin that does something very niche that you could simply not live without any more , because what if you do need to live without it? If you ever change machine or do pair programming or whatever where you are no…

I used to think like that. Now days I'm shifting again towards the other direction, more specifically I think it is good idea to move towards being in a setting where customized (and specialized) environment makes sense. Meaning that if projects and computers and people constantly shift and change around you, then sure, learning to live with defaults makes sense. But that also means working with one hand tied behind your back and at least for me ultimately unsatisfactory. That being said, don't put cart before the horse; first find that stability, the confidence that things are going to stick, and after that consider what customization makes sense.

I think todays culture where the things you work on and the tools you use is in constant flux is hurting us in this regard; it has made us too scared to truly invest deeply at a personal level on some specific thing.

Re: We need more zero config tools

#49

Post by zokier »

rcxdude wrote: post #22

Sensible defaults are very much appreciated (and I've also adopted the philosophy of trying to avoid depending on elaborate customised configurations), but zero-config is not a good goal in and of itself. Very frequently I've found a configuration option is the difference between a tool that does and doesn't work at all for me.

but on the flip side not all tools need to work for all people
Post reply on HN