One of the nicest things I discovered about sublime text 2 personally is that it handles ginormous files very well. Having a text editor that doesn't crash on that occasional 1gb text file you need to look at is a nice thing
Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
91–100 of 115 posts
Re: Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
#92Reading some of the comments here, it's evident that planet Emacs, where I'm from, is in a galaxy a long ways away from planet "I give a shit about the icons". Sounds like the guy behind the project is quite responsive, and doing a good job for a good price, but I'm just way too attached to having open source tools for my work.
Oh, it's closed source? OK, there goes all my interest.
It's odd how you just expect certain kinds of software to be open source today.
Edit: Since I'm getting downvoted as-is, let me flesh out this posting with some more explanation for my stance: My text editor is an application I will invest a lot of time in learning and customizing, and it's important to me that this investment will end up being worth the effort long into the future. With a closed source text editor, I don't have the same level of confidence that the product will continue to exist and be maintained. Closed source also means that parts of the application are off-limits to customization, and I don't want to be beholden to another's determination of what part of the app is on that side of the fence.
Re: Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
#93As much as I think sublime is beautiful and rather useful, I think I'll have to stick with vim. I've invested too much time learning how to use it and configuring it to throw all that away, and besides, it's that effort that has made me so efficient in the environment. There is a "vintage" mode ( http://www.sublimetext.com/docs/2/vintage.html ) that supports some vi bindings, but until I can use vim proper from withi…
Same here… Additionally, I also use boatloads of plugins that I've come to rely on. Among the most important ones are Fugitive, syntastic, and gundo (seriously, branched undos have saved my life in the past, and visualizing them in a tree? Hell yes.) But there's also more basic ones, like surround, tagbar, and eclim (if I were a full-time Java dev, I'd need eclim.) It's a chicken-and-egg problem, really. Vim is here,…
Sublime Text 2 has a plugin that emulates Surround. It has a pretty good mode for Git interaction. Even its Vintage (Vim emulation) mode is really surprisingly good. Hell, it even has a mode that is beginning to emulate Emacs' org-mode. Only time will tell how far it will go.
Re: Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
#94The new icon is better, but I still prefer this third party icon: http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tools-and-tips/sublime-tex...
There are a bunch of 3rd party icons that are all better than the new icon. I aggregated them last month: http://blog.jerodsanto.net/2012/01/sublime-text-2-icon-repla...
The Icon Factory does (highly acclaimed and visible) work. The new icon is about a million times more polished than any of those options, in my opinion.
Re: Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
#95I love this editor, it's fast with big files. Bought my license last week.
Some useful shortcuts here https://gist.github.com/1207002
Re: Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
#96Reading some of the comments here, it's evident that planet Emacs, where I'm from, is in a galaxy a long ways away from planet "I give a shit about the icons". Sounds like the guy behind the project is quite responsive, and doing a good job for a good price, but I'm just way too attached to having open source tools for my work.
Oh, it's closed source? OK, there goes all my interest. It's odd how you just expect certain kinds of software to be open source today. Edit: Since I'm getting downvoted as-is, let me flesh out this posting with some more explanation for my stance: My text editor is an application I will invest a lot of time in learning and customizing, and it's important to me that this investment will end up being worth the effort…
I actually agree with you completely: at this point you'd just assume that text editors would be free.
That said, I work faster in ST2 than I did in Emacs and I can very quickly repay its purchase price in increased productivity. Should ST2's author get hit by a bus tomorrow and every copy of ST2 in the world instantly stop working, I could go back to Emacs and still have benefitted from having ST2 in the mean time.
Suppose someone offers you a golden goose that earns you $1 an hour but costs $100. If you get your $100 back out of it before the goose dies, you've broken even. If you get $101 out of it, you've turned a profit. If you get $500 out of it, you've made a good investment. I've already made my money back on ST2. If I lose the use of it, I've still come out ahead.
Re: Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
ST2 handles this much like ido-mode. Press cmd-P to open the "Goto Anything" dialog and type a few letters from a filename to get a list of matching files from the current project. I'm not exactly sure of the weighting algorithm, but it seems to almost always highlight files that are already open so that pressing enter will take me directly to the tab I wanted. Whether you have 100 Emacs buffers open or 100 ST2 tabs,…
Why keep 100 ST2 tabs open when like you've said it's so fast to just cmd-p to pull up the file you need, open or not (unless you have a very large number of files with the same name)? I summon and dismiss files like crazy, but I generally only keep a few things open at any time.
Let me flip that around: why not have all the most recent files you've worked on open at once? It's easy to navigate through them, you get to keep undo history, and you can always close them later if you get overwhelmed. There's not a huge advantage to keeping them around but the penalty for doing so is trivial, so I default to not closing tabs unless I specifically need to.
Re: Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, it's closed source? OK, there goes all my interest. It's odd how you just expect certain kinds of software to be open source today. Edit: Since I'm getting downvoted as-is, let me flesh out this posting with some more explanation for my stance: My text editor is an application I will invest a lot of time in learning and customizing, and it's important to me that this investment will end up being worth the effort…
I actually agree with you completely: at this point you'd just assume that text editors would be free. That said, I work faster in ST2 than I did in Emacs and I can very quickly repay its purchase price in increased productivity. Should ST2's author get hit by a bus tomorrow and every copy of ST2 in the world instantly stop working, I could go back to Emacs and still have benefitted from having ST2 in the mean time.…
Let me be clear though that I wasn't talking about price. Rather I was genuinely surprised to learn that it wasn't open source, perhaps because so many of the top editors are, because of its persistent popularity in these circles and its dalliance with open solutions, and because I would expect someone starting a new high-end text editor today to want to put the project on solid long-term footing, which to me implies open and community involvement.
Re: Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still prefer to not have spaces in file names. I then don't need to use quotes or escape spaces when typing the file name in the shell.
backslash-space isn't any harder to type than shift-underscore.
Or you could just use the dash or period as delimiters.
Re: Sublime Text 2 Build 2181
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why shouldn't he? Are you using MS-DOS?
Because nobody else ever does? Windows apps, linux apps, javascript libraries, etc etc do not put spaces in filenames. The only spaces in filenames I have for downloaded files on my computer are the people that insist on sending me an excel document full of jpg screenshots.
Your logic. It makes no sense.