4 ms·

> we can get great benefits from a system that expands abbreviations, ... emmet-style powers I can't agree here (excepting perhaps the unicode char replacement

> we can get great benefits from a system that expands abbreviations, ... emmet-style powers I can't agree here (excepting perhaps the unicode char replacement which a non-english speaker needs to comment on the viability of, vs actually having a non-english keyboard (excepting huge alphabets like chinese where that is used already AFAIK)). Writing is fundamentally a thinking process, the text entry for a touch typist is relatively quick. If you are to propose expanding abbreviations, how much time do you expect to save? I mean, actually measured it? > runs little scripts and inserts the output What is the purpose of this? > gives you quick dictionary/thesaurus lookups I use those perhaps once a week or less. If you use it say 3X a day, you'd save little time, perhaps a couple of minutes. Dunno what emmet powers are though. MS word & libreOffice does some of what you want and the first time I install them, I spend several minutes tracking down each setting and turning them off - they drive me bonkers. They think they know what I want but they don't. Touch typists can hit many keys a second and kind of pipeline their typing. Having the input modified automatically is rarely useful IMO. Your idea may be good but like many other ideas such as graphical programming, except in restricted cases they don't work. Perhaps if you measured it I'd be convinced but I can't accept it now as an obviously great benefit.

chrisweekly 7y ago
IIUC the parent was suggesting an OS-level system that _supports_ these features natively, as the foundation layer for any number of userland tools to sit atop... vs your compelling arg for why said features must be straightforward to disable. I don't see a conflict.
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  True, upvoted. My point was that these facilities are of questionable value (I'd like to see how much time they really save, or indeed even lose when triggered accidentally), and that they have to be in easy control of the user. With MS there's too much "we invented it so you're getting it", and bad designers (who always outnumber good) will do the same. Actual example, was working with vis studio with another guy. Open a bracket and VS automatically added a closing bracket. That is fucking annoying and saves you a whole keystroke while breaking muscle memory and interfereing with our work. We had trouble turning that off.
maest 7y ago
I don't have strong feelings about what the GP says, but: > I use those perhaps once a week or less. If you use it say 3X a day, you'd save little time, perhaps a couple of minutes. Maybe you only use them so rarely because they're not convenient to use.
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  I use them rarely because my vocabulary is reasonably large. Also, given a choice of words I'll prefer the more conventional one. For people learning, perhaps it could be a good thing.
JadeNB 7y ago
This seems an awful lot like arguing that, since you are happy at the CLI, there's no need for a GUI. Widespread availability of rich OS-level IMEs wouldn't hurt anyone, and could help everyone. (Even for someone like you who wants to pass through raw hex, it's easier to tell that once to the OS rather than to have to argue with each app individually.)
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  I was unclear. I'm not against anything, just saying let the user control it, just make sure some great idea actually works (user testing shows many great thing aren't; people are complex and so are their mental models) then not force it on users.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
> Writing is fundamentally a thinking process, the text entry for a touch typist is relatively quick. If you are to propose expanding abbreviations, how much time do you expect to save? I mean, actually measured it? Not quick enough. I think faster than I type, and I type fast. It's fine until I start getting impatient with myself. Call it micro-impatience, a flash of irritation in which you're suddenly conscious of not having finished typing in the thought. It's distracting. Honestly, I like parent's idea; a good chunk of Emacs's awesomeness and the reason people like me use it as an operating system is because of that - unified, fully configurable and expandable text-based interface. I often wish to have something like it system-wide, because standard UIs are very far from optimum ergonomy-wise. But then again I wouldn't trust Apple or Microsoft to do it right; they'd quickly find a way to dumb it down, or restrict the extensibility in the name of security.
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  To address just one point, in emacs you've dabbrev-expand (bound to M-/). I like it and use it but it is not automatic. I have to invoke it myself which means it can't get in the way. If you want larger clumps of code then you have various options such as skeleton mode, but again that's something the user has to ensure happens - again they remain in control. > But then again I wouldn't trust Apple or Microsoft to do it right Oh hell yes!
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > I have to invoke it myself which means it can't get in the way. For the sake of completeness, you can always make it automatic. All it takes is to add a function to post-self-insert-hook, and make it e.g. call dabbrev-expand if you pressed space twice. So you can have it any way you like - manual, automatic, semi-automatic. You're in full control. > If you want larger clumps of code then you have various options such as skeleton mode Yes. I currently use yasnippets for code. Still, my favourite yasnippet is one I use in comments - it expands "todo" into: "TODO: | -- [my name], 2019-10-29.", and similarly for "note", "hack" and "fixme". | is where the caret ends after expansion. That's the kind of flexibility I wish my OS had. Unfortunately, it goes against the commercial interest of mainstream OS providers.

chrisweekly 7y ago

IIUC the parent was suggesting an OS-level system that _supports_ these features natively, as the foundation layer for any number of userland tools to sit atop... vs your compelling arg for why said features must be straightforward to disable. I don't see a conflict.

tempguy9999 7y ago
True, upvoted. My point was that these facilities are of questionable value (I'd like to see how much time they really save, or indeed even lose when triggered accidentally), and that they have to be in easy control of the user. With MS there's too much "we invented it so you're getting it", and bad designers (who always outnumber good) will do the same. Actual example, was working with vis studio with another guy. Open a bracket and VS automatically added a closing bracket. That is fucking annoying and saves you a whole keystroke while breaking muscle memory and interfereing with our work. We had trouble turning that off.

maest 7y ago

I don't have strong feelings about what the GP says, but: > I use those perhaps once a week or less. If you use it say 3X a day, you'd save little time, perhaps a couple of minutes. Maybe you only use them so rarely because they're not convenient to use.

tempguy9999 7y ago
I use them rarely because my vocabulary is reasonably large. Also, given a choice of words I'll prefer the more conventional one. For people learning, perhaps it could be a good thing.

JadeNB 7y ago

This seems an awful lot like arguing that, since you are happy at the CLI, there's no need for a GUI. Widespread availability of rich OS-level IMEs wouldn't hurt anyone, and could help everyone. (Even for someone like you who wants to pass through raw hex, it's easier to tell that once to the OS rather than to have to argue with each app individually.)

tempguy9999 7y ago
I was unclear. I'm not against anything, just saying let the user control it, just make sure some great idea actually works (user testing shows many great thing aren't; people are complex and so are their mental models) then not force it on users.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

> Writing is fundamentally a thinking process, the text entry for a touch typist is relatively quick. If you are to propose expanding abbreviations, how much time do you expect to save? I mean, actually measured it? Not quick enough. I think faster than I type, and I type fast. It's fine until I start getting impatient with myself. Call it micro-impatience, a flash of irritation in which you're suddenly conscious of not having finished typing in the thought. It's distracting. Honestly, I like parent's idea; a good chunk of Emacs's awesomeness and the reason people like me use it as an operating system is because of that - unified, fully configurable and expandable text-based interface. I often wish to have something like it system-wide, because standard UIs are very far from optimum ergonomy-wise. But then again I wouldn't trust Apple or Microsoft to do it right; they'd quickly find a way to dumb it down, or restrict the extensibility in the name of security.

tempguy9999 7y ago
To address just one point, in emacs you've dabbrev-expand (bound to M-/). I like it and use it but it is not automatic. I have to invoke it myself which means it can't get in the way. If you want larger clumps of code then you have various options such as skeleton mode, but again that's something the user has to ensure happens - again they remain in control. > But then again I wouldn't trust Apple or Microsoft to do it right Oh hell yes!
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  > I have to invoke it myself which means it can't get in the way. For the sake of completeness, you can always make it automatic. All it takes is to add a function to post-self-insert-hook, and make it e.g. call dabbrev-expand if you pressed space twice. So you can have it any way you like - manual, automatic, semi-automatic. You're in full control. > If you want larger clumps of code then you have various options such as skeleton mode Yes. I currently use yasnippets for code. Still, my favourite yasnippet is one I use in comments - it expands "todo" into: "TODO: | -- [my name], 2019-10-29.", and similarly for "note", "hack" and "fixme". | is where the caret ends after expansion. That's the kind of flexibility I wish my OS had. Unfortunately, it goes against the commercial interest of mainstream OS providers.