2 ms·
> So, there really was no trade off for the power vi and emacs offered (less powerful alternatives of the time were still just as inaccessible), where now ther
by zeveb 11y ago
> So, there really was no trade off for the power vi and emacs offered (less powerful alternatives of the time were still just as inaccessible), where now there is.
There's simply nothing out there as good as emacs. Nothing. Eclipse, IntelliJ, Atom, SublimeText, all those pale in comparison. vim has its positive points (it's an excellent way for a human to edit line-oriented text), but ultimately it too falls down in the general case. emacs is simply the best way for a human being to use a computer to edit data.
There still isn't an alternative to vim and emacs. I kinda wish there were, but there ain't. Someday I'd like to use a modern emacs-like editor, implemented in Common Lisp (or a successor language), but right now emacs is the pinnacle of editor evolution.
- cyphar 11y ago> vim has its positive points (it's an excellent way for a human to edit line-oriented text), but ultimately it too falls down in the general case I think the only thing that Vim doesn't do that it should is actually use a proper language for scripting. Emacs has elisp, but Vim has VimScript which is a horribly stunted langauge. Aside from that, I much prefer vim to emacs. Just because everything is mode-based, and the keybindings don't require 10 hands to do anything.
- zeveb 11y agoCheck out spacemacs: the modes of vim, and the extensibility of emacs. Not really by cup of tea, but it sounds pretty cool.