6 ms·

http://blog.vivekhaldar.com/post/3996068979/the-levels-of-emacs-proficiency http://blog.vivekhaldar.com/post/3996068979/the-levels-of-em... "It was all just te

http://blog.vivekhaldar.com/post/3996068979/the-levels-of-emacs-proficiency http://blog.vivekhaldar.com/post/3996068979/the-levels-of-em... "It was all just text. Why did you need another application for it? Why should only the shell prompt be editable? Why can’t I move my cursor up a few lines to where the last command spewed out its results? All these problems simply disappear when your shell (or shells) simply becomes another Emacs buffer, upon which all of the text manipulation power of Emacs can be brought to bear."

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
This is Atom's great failing: it's trying to do the emacs thing, but it doesn't treat all buffers uniformly: your settings window, your terminal window, and the various text windows are fundamentally different. Until this is fixed, it's not even in the running as a usable editor for me.
- zeveb 10y ago
  > This is Atom's great failing: it's trying to do the emacs thing, but it doesn't treat all buffers uniformly That's definitely a great failing, but I think it has two greater still: not being written in Lisp, and being written in JavaScript. The former could be overcome (Alpha was an amazing editor for the Mac written in TCL), and after all there are plenty of great programmes not written in Lisp (emacs, for example, has a C core …). But JavaScript‽ JavaScript: there's got to be a better way. JavaScript: warn your friends about it. JavaScript: dissatisfaction guaranteed.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    JS is fine. It's got warts, yes, but so has elisp. It's also got proper lexical scoping, and real, function-equivalent lambdas, which are surprisingly rare.
Avshalom 10y ago
This is of course such a transparently good idea that Acme and 9term adopted it too.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  I was never as much a fan of Acme. It was a neat idea, but I don't think it was executed as well as Emacs was. And it doesn't work super well outside plan9. And I need to edit over SSH a lot. And keyboard > mouse, IMHO.
  - mixedCase 10y ago
    > And I need to edit over SSH a lot. Try sshfs :) Surprising that someone who has tried Plan 9 hasn't come to love specialized filesystems!
    - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      I would, but in the locations I'm in, the only computer I can access is my school chromebook: no X. :-(
      - mixedCase 10y ago
        sshfs doesn't require X...? It's just a filesystem.
        qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        No, but Acme/Sam ports do. And emacs, vim, and sam and acme ports all require a POSIX api which the chromebook lacks.
        _acme 10y ago
        Not all ports of Acme/Sam require X.
sleepybrett 10y ago
xiki
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Not the same thing at all.
sly010 10y ago
I vaguely remember the C64 had something like this. You could move the cursor up to an old line, modify the line, then press RETURN to run it. Mind you I was like 8 years old.

qwertyuiop924 10y ago

This is Atom's great failing: it's trying to do the emacs thing, but it doesn't treat all buffers uniformly: your settings window, your terminal window, and the various text windows are fundamentally different. Until this is fixed, it's not even in the running as a usable editor for me.

zeveb 10y ago
> This is Atom's great failing: it's trying to do the emacs thing, but it doesn't treat all buffers uniformly That's definitely a great failing, but I think it has two greater still: not being written in Lisp, and being written in JavaScript. The former could be overcome (Alpha was an amazing editor for the Mac written in TCL), and after all there are plenty of great programmes not written in Lisp (emacs, for example, has a C core …). But JavaScript‽ JavaScript: there's got to be a better way. JavaScript: warn your friends about it. JavaScript: dissatisfaction guaranteed.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  JS is fine. It's got warts, yes, but so has elisp. It's also got proper lexical scoping, and real, function-equivalent lambdas, which are surprisingly rare.

Avshalom 10y ago

This is of course such a transparently good idea that Acme and 9term adopted it too.

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
I was never as much a fan of Acme. It was a neat idea, but I don't think it was executed as well as Emacs was. And it doesn't work super well outside plan9. And I need to edit over SSH a lot. And keyboard > mouse, IMHO.
- mixedCase 10y ago
  > And I need to edit over SSH a lot. Try sshfs :) Surprising that someone who has tried Plan 9 hasn't come to love specialized filesystems!
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    I would, but in the locations I'm in, the only computer I can access is my school chromebook: no X. :-(
    - mixedCase 10y ago
      sshfs doesn't require X...? It's just a filesystem.
      - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        No, but Acme/Sam ports do. And emacs, vim, and sam and acme ports all require a POSIX api which the chromebook lacks.
        _acme 10y ago
        Not all ports of Acme/Sam require X.

sleepybrett 10y ago

xiki

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
Not the same thing at all.

sly010 10y ago

I vaguely remember the C64 had something like this. You could move the cursor up to an old line, modify the line, then press RETURN to run it. Mind you I was like 8 years old.