4 ms·
> What I didn’t like about Vim was that a good number of plugins always felt like a hack. > Also, why not Emacs? I wanted to change my editor, not my operating
by zeveb 10y ago
> What I didn’t like about Vim was that a good number of plugins always felt like a hack.
> Also, why not Emacs? I wanted to change my editor, not my operating system :P.
He really made a mistake here, IMHO. Spacemacs is exactly the right solution here: can run on the console, can run in a GUI, meant to be extended (extending emacs isn't a hack: it's using emacs).
- mixedCase 10y agoI briefly tried Emacs both alone and with Spacemacs. Spacemacs configuration is impenetrable, specially if you're not a LISP fan and Emacs simply needs a lot of glue to work well with Evil. Even then one has to know and use quite a few regular keybinds. At that point it just wasn't worth the effort to me over using a more modern and straightforward editor.
- zeveb 10y ago> Spacemacs configuration is impenetrable, specially if you're not a LISP fan I find its configuration very nice — I don't actually use spacemacs regularly, but I miss how clean its package system tends to be over normal emacs configs. And everyone should be a Lisp fan, since it's the best language we've managed to come up with yet. > At that point it just wasn't worth the effort to me over using a more modern and straightforward editor. I don't think there's any editor more modern than emacs; there's certainly none more powerful. More straightforward? Well, nano is probably the most straightforward, but I wouldn't want to use it regularly.