3 ms·

One editor to rule them all, then you don't have to individually configure every IDE with various idiosyncratic preferences. & learn new sets of commands which

by __s 10y ago

One editor to rule them all, then you don't have to individually configure every IDE with various idiosyncratic preferences. & learn new sets of commands which you can't take with you elsewhere. Reuse muscle memory between all situations. Reuse over SSH. Low resource requirements. Infinite scriptability

smt88 10y ago
Multiple editors would have been an issue for me a few years ago, but JetBrains has changed that (for the set of languages I use, anyway). I can use the same IDE for a bunch of different ecosystems. Reuse over SSH is a compelling reason. Do you still have low resource requirements if using things like linting, hinting, and full graphical debugging?
- db48x 10y ago
  Yes, Emacs is very light-weight no matter what you're doing. Although I must admit that my copy is using 3.45GB of memory at the moment; I opened a 1.8GB tar file... that was on a remote machine.
- wtbob 10y ago
  > Multiple editors would have been an issue for me a few years ago, but JetBrains has changed that (for the set of languages I use, anyway). I can use the same IDE for a bunch of different ecosystems. Exactly. Now, imagine being able to use that same IDE for everything JetBrains supports, and to read man pages, and to read info pages, and to read & compose email, and to list the processes running on your computer, and to manage files in directories, and to emulate a terminal, and to browse the web, and to play NetHack, and to use IRC, and to manage git repos, and to do every other thing you want. And all the keybindings remain consistent throughout all of those modes. And you can easily schlep data back & forth between them. And it's extensible in a relatively sane language (sane compared to Java, JavaScript, C, C++ and Python, anyway). That's why we use emacs. That's why it's very difficult to understand why anyone else doesn't use emacs. > Do you still have low resource requirements if using things like linting, hinting, and full graphical debugging? Emacs can be pretty amazingly fast even with all of that running. There are advantages to having first been written back when computers were small.
- rayiner 10y ago
  On my MBP, I can get about 6-7 hours of low-intensity use out of VS Code or Clion, which is pretty unconscionable because I think slowly and most of that time is just waiting for keystrokes. I get about 8-9 with graphical Emacs (with autocomplete, etc). I get about 11 using Emacs on a remote server over ssh. Auto complete, etc, works fine on the terminal.

by __s 10y ago

smt88 10y ago

Multiple editors would have been an issue for me a few years ago, but JetBrains has changed that (for the set of languages I use, anyway). I can use the same IDE for a bunch of different ecosystems. Reuse over SSH is a compelling reason. Do you still have low resource requirements if using things like linting, hinting, and full graphical debugging?

db48x 10y ago
Yes, Emacs is very light-weight no matter what you're doing. Although I must admit that my copy is using 3.45GB of memory at the moment; I opened a 1.8GB tar file... that was on a remote machine.
wtbob 10y ago
> Multiple editors would have been an issue for me a few years ago, but JetBrains has changed that (for the set of languages I use, anyway). I can use the same IDE for a bunch of different ecosystems. Exactly. Now, imagine being able to use that same IDE for everything JetBrains supports, and to read man pages, and to read info pages, and to read & compose email, and to list the processes running on your computer, and to manage files in directories, and to emulate a terminal, and to browse the web, and to play NetHack, and to use IRC, and to manage git repos, and to do every other thing you want. And all the keybindings remain consistent throughout all of those modes. And you can easily schlep data back & forth between them. And it's extensible in a relatively sane language (sane compared to Java, JavaScript, C, C++ and Python, anyway). That's why we use emacs. That's why it's very difficult to understand why anyone else doesn't use emacs. > Do you still have low resource requirements if using things like linting, hinting, and full graphical debugging? Emacs can be pretty amazingly fast even with all of that running. There are advantages to having first been written back when computers were small.
rayiner 10y ago
On my MBP, I can get about 6-7 hours of low-intensity use out of VS Code or Clion, which is pretty unconscionable because I think slowly and most of that time is just waiting for keystrokes. I get about 8-9 with graphical Emacs (with autocomplete, etc). I get about 11 using Emacs on a remote server over ssh. Auto complete, etc, works fine on the terminal.