5 ms·

I love both Vim and Emacs, but I think they have different use cases. For example, I find it much more productive to use Emacs for writing heavy tasks, where y

I love both Vim and Emacs, but I think they have different use cases. For example, I find it much more productive to use Emacs for writing heavy tasks, where you'll spend a lot of time in the editor. Such as coding, writing notes, a book, an article, a paper, etc. To me, these tasks suffer from having to switch back and forth between modes, and emacs just provides more features for them and can be customized endlessly to your specifics. Vim on the other hand shines for quick edits, touch ups, or reading, viewing and analysing use cases. Its best feature is performance. It starts fast, runs fast, can handle big files, consumes little memory and is small in size. This is ideal on a server, or as a default editor. I wouldn't want to have Emacs for these, it's too heavy. For editing small parts of an existing file, the modal editing is also best. It makes navigation front and center, which is what you want, quickly find the part to edit, and quickly edit it, done. I personally like it this way. I don't actually want Vim to grow to approach Emacs in customization. I also don't think anything can, the fundamental design of Emacs as a Lisp REPL with an editor loaded into it just can't be beat for that.

newen 8y ago
$ alias cs='emacsclient -nw' $ emacs --daemon $ cs notes.txt Emacs starts up pretty quick for me. Kind of agree though, especially about the modal editing and quickly navigating. I often start up vim when I want to edit a word or two at a specific line fast. I switch over to emacs if I end up editing multiple lines and organizing the text.
thomastjeffery 8y ago
emacsclient really fills the gap for me. I have emacs running as a systemd service, so I never notice its real start time. > I don't actually want Vim to grow to approach Emacs in customization. It already has. The difference is that it doesn't come with very many packages, and packages aren't all written in elisp. Neovim will end up with a similar amount of packages eventually. A lot of those packages will be written in Lua, making them relatively fast and lightweight. (Neo)Vim doesn't lend itself to total customizability, since its foundation is dependent on its default keybindings.
- didibus 8y ago
  When I meant customization, I didn't mean the availability of plugins. I meant the ability to change everything, and do it myself simply and quickly if needed, from within the editor itself. There's only two editors I know that give you that, Emacs and Atom. That said, I didn't try neovim, but it just seems like Vim with Lua plugins. Kinda similar to how Sublime Text can have Python plugins.
  - thomastjeffery 8y ago
    I agree: Vim is really held back by its reliance on default keymaps. Sure, you can remap them, but they are still the lifeblood of what Vim is. You can't change what they are. Even emacs has this problem: there is a general set of consistent keymaps that are set by a wide variety of emacs modes. It's certainly not a trivial task to change, or get rid of them.
- _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
  Careful running emacs as a systemd service. I did this for some time, but then one day when I rebooted the computer, nothing worked - drives weren't mounted properly, services I expected weren't there. I finally found that none of my systemd services had come up (but systemd didn't generate errors or failed messages) and yet later still discovered that it was apparently an error in my .emacs that had somehow caused a domino effect of none of my systemd services starting up. I've gone back to just having `emacs --daemon` in my .xnitrc.
  - thomastjeffery 8y ago
    I've had errors in my .emacs, and had no issues. I don't see your experience as a reason to not to do it this way. In case you are interested, I followed the instructions here: https://nixos.org/nixos/manual/index.html#idm140737316012272 https://nixos.org/nixos/manual/index.html#idm140737316012272 I imagine it is a very common practice for NixOS users to run emacs as a systemd service.
    - 8y ago
dmortin 8y ago
For server editing there is Tramp, so Emacs does not have to be installed on the server at all to edit files there.
- atilaneves 8y ago
  I don't understand the meme of "vim is great because I ssh and it's intalled everywhere" when tramp exists.
  - giancarlostoro 8y ago
    Indeed, I open Emacs and can edit files on multiple target platforms.
- falcolas 8y ago
  Does tramp work well when you have a bastion server?
  - kip_ 8y ago
    The docs located at https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/tramp/Multi_002dhops.html https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/tramp/Mu... should help you there.
another-cuppa 8y ago
When I install Gentoo or Arch, one of the first things I install is vim and one of the last things I install is emacs because that's where I do all my work.
ptero 8y ago
Both editors are fully capable, it really depends on personal preferences: what they see as a minor if any annoyance: multi-key presses or two-mode editing. I use vim and it works great for me for large tasks as well. I never developed a pianist's finger agility for multi-key commands (those famous Esc-Meta-Alt-Ctl-Shift types). If I did I probably would have loved Emacs more than vim.
- zeveb 8y ago
  > Both editors [ed: vim & emacs] are fully capable, it really depends on personal preferences I think that Paul Graham's Blub Paradox[0] applies to editors and operating environments as well as to programming languages: someone using an editor or environment which sits at a particular level can look down at lesser editors or environments and see how much more productive his is, but when he looks up at other editors or environments he just thinks they don't make sense — at best they solve problems he's never had, and at worst they are just plain weird. The troublesome thing is, vi is in many ways a better editor than emacs is, but emacs is definitely a better operating environment than vi, vim or neovim is, so you're kinda stuck. If you want a great editor, then you want vi — but then you're stuck with a terrible, sub-par editing environment. If you want a great environment, emacs is hands-down the best — but you're stuck with a hand-hurting morass of keychords. I honestly don't believe it's a personal preference to state that vi's text-manipulation language is better than emacs's, but I also honestly don't believe it's a personal preference to state that emacs is a better, more extensible environment than vi, vi or neovim. Spacemacs is a really interesting experiment in merging the two, adding the text-editing language of vi to the operating environment of emacs. It's probably the way of the future, although there are just enough rough edges that I ended up returning to emacs. Why did I do that, when vi is the better editor? Because as important as editing text is, emacs provides an entire environment for computing. It's the ocean in which I swim, the forest in which I hunt, the field where I sow my corn and the air I breathe. Less poetically, Magit & Org mode are awesome; four decades of contributed code mean that just about anything I want to do has been implemented; elisp means that anything that hasn't is easily implementable. 0: http://paulgraham.com/avg.html http://paulgraham.com/avg.html
  - 8y ago
arminiusreturns 8y ago
I use emacs for almost everything, but for me nano is the lightweight gnu editor I use when I would use vi(m)... of course, knowing vim is important because some systems only have it. (but with emacs I can just edit files remotely anyway)

newen 8y ago

$ alias cs='emacsclient -nw' $ emacs --daemon $ cs notes.txt Emacs starts up pretty quick for me. Kind of agree though, especially about the modal editing and quickly navigating. I often start up vim when I want to edit a word or two at a specific line fast. I switch over to emacs if I end up editing multiple lines and organizing the text.

thomastjeffery 8y ago

emacsclient really fills the gap for me. I have emacs running as a systemd service, so I never notice its real start time. > I don't actually want Vim to grow to approach Emacs in customization. It already has. The difference is that it doesn't come with very many packages, and packages aren't all written in elisp. Neovim will end up with a similar amount of packages eventually. A lot of those packages will be written in Lua, making them relatively fast and lightweight. (Neo)Vim doesn't lend itself to total customizability, since its foundation is dependent on its default keybindings.

didibus 8y ago
When I meant customization, I didn't mean the availability of plugins. I meant the ability to change everything, and do it myself simply and quickly if needed, from within the editor itself. There's only two editors I know that give you that, Emacs and Atom. That said, I didn't try neovim, but it just seems like Vim with Lua plugins. Kinda similar to how Sublime Text can have Python plugins.
- thomastjeffery 8y ago
  I agree: Vim is really held back by its reliance on default keymaps. Sure, you can remap them, but they are still the lifeblood of what Vim is. You can't change what they are. Even emacs has this problem: there is a general set of consistent keymaps that are set by a wide variety of emacs modes. It's certainly not a trivial task to change, or get rid of them.
_emacsomancer_ 8y ago
Careful running emacs as a systemd service. I did this for some time, but then one day when I rebooted the computer, nothing worked - drives weren't mounted properly, services I expected weren't there. I finally found that none of my systemd services had come up (but systemd didn't generate errors or failed messages) and yet later still discovered that it was apparently an error in my .emacs that had somehow caused a domino effect of none of my systemd services starting up. I've gone back to just having `emacs --daemon` in my .xnitrc.
- thomastjeffery 8y ago
  I've had errors in my .emacs, and had no issues. I don't see your experience as a reason to not to do it this way. In case you are interested, I followed the instructions here: https://nixos.org/nixos/manual/index.html#idm140737316012272 https://nixos.org/nixos/manual/index.html#idm140737316012272 I imagine it is a very common practice for NixOS users to run emacs as a systemd service.
  - 8y ago

dmortin 8y ago

For server editing there is Tramp, so Emacs does not have to be installed on the server at all to edit files there.

atilaneves 8y ago
I don't understand the meme of "vim is great because I ssh and it's intalled everywhere" when tramp exists.
- giancarlostoro 8y ago
  Indeed, I open Emacs and can edit files on multiple target platforms.
falcolas 8y ago
Does tramp work well when you have a bastion server?
- kip_ 8y ago
  The docs located at https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/tramp/Multi_002dhops.html https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/tramp/Mu... should help you there.

another-cuppa 8y ago

When I install Gentoo or Arch, one of the first things I install is vim and one of the last things I install is emacs because that's where I do all my work.

ptero 8y ago

Both editors are fully capable, it really depends on personal preferences: what they see as a minor if any annoyance: multi-key presses or two-mode editing. I use vim and it works great for me for large tasks as well. I never developed a pianist's finger agility for multi-key commands (those famous Esc-Meta-Alt-Ctl-Shift types). If I did I probably would have loved Emacs more than vim.

zeveb 8y ago
> Both editors [ed: vim & emacs] are fully capable, it really depends on personal preferences I think that Paul Graham's Blub Paradox[0] applies to editors and operating environments as well as to programming languages: someone using an editor or environment which sits at a particular level can look down at lesser editors or environments and see how much more productive his is, but when he looks up at other editors or environments he just thinks they don't make sense — at best they solve problems he's never had, and at worst they are just plain weird. The troublesome thing is, vi is in many ways a better editor than emacs is, but emacs is definitely a better operating environment than vi, vim or neovim is, so you're kinda stuck. If you want a great editor, then you want vi — but then you're stuck with a terrible, sub-par editing environment. If you want a great environment, emacs is hands-down the best — but you're stuck with a hand-hurting morass of keychords. I honestly don't believe it's a personal preference to state that vi's text-manipulation language is better than emacs's, but I also honestly don't believe it's a personal preference to state that emacs is a better, more extensible environment than vi, vi or neovim. Spacemacs is a really interesting experiment in merging the two, adding the text-editing language of vi to the operating environment of emacs. It's probably the way of the future, although there are just enough rough edges that I ended up returning to emacs. Why did I do that, when vi is the better editor? Because as important as editing text is, emacs provides an entire environment for computing. It's the ocean in which I swim, the forest in which I hunt, the field where I sow my corn and the air I breathe. Less poetically, Magit & Org mode are awesome; four decades of contributed code mean that just about anything I want to do has been implemented; elisp means that anything that hasn't is easily implementable. 0: http://paulgraham.com/avg.html http://paulgraham.com/avg.html
- 8y ago

arminiusreturns 8y ago

I use emacs for almost everything, but for me nano is the lightweight gnu editor I use when I would use vi(m)... of course, knowing vim is important because some systems only have it. (but with emacs I can just edit files remotely anyway)