4 ms·

Exactly what I mean. It is insane. I can't get it straight. I really tried years ago. But it is plain and simple stupid. Words once written don't need to be ab

Exactly what I mean. It is insane. I can't get it straight. I really tried years ago. But it is plain and simple stupid. Words once written don't need to be abbreviated. Abbrevation is only useful when writting for speed. When writting for being read don't use them.

microcolonel 6y ago
> Exactly what I mean. It is insane. I can't get it straight. I really tried years ago. But it is plain and simple stupid. No, you're just being ignorant, and not reading when people try to answer your questions. > Abbreviation is only useful when writing for speed. When writing for reading, don't use them. It's not an abbreviation, it's a different symbol. C is not Ctrl. The software has some “baggage”, being the heir to a 40+ year legacy, but the problems you're ragging on are so shallow that it just tells me you never tried. Why would anyone want to continue holding the hand of somebody who isn't even trying? Emacs is full of excellent documentation, the first thing it tells you when you open it is how to find the documentation, and if you have a mouse you can just click it; if you opened it and decided not to read the intro, but somehow a lot of other people are using it productively, maybe the main problem lies with you. If you're looking for a piece of software that'll give you some sort of religious aesthetic orgasm just looking at it; sure, you'll be let down. If you were trying to get something done and approaching it honestly, these would not be your complaints about Emacs; trust me that there's a lot wrong with it. Having its own slightly different keybinding notation is like... number five thousand on the long list of actual issues with any honest attempt to be productive with Emacs.
- jrimbault 6y ago
  And yet I could get a few things done in vim in a few minutes, and much more than that in a few weeks. And I choose not to use vim. And yet you said vim has insane key mapping but more people somehow use vim than emacs. Some things are not adding up. Emacs has excellent documentation but somehow very few people are able to use it. Some things are not adding up. Emacs interface and community mannerisms _are_ user-hostile. As demonstrated by history.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    Hey, chill. There are lots of things that seem daunting at first and unforgiving to the impatient beginner: chess, surfing, martial arts, drawing... it doesn't mean that any of those are user-hostile, it just means that those that want to learn and master it will need to develop a certain discipline. If you don't want that, fine. But what is the point of going around and saying that those who do enjoy these things are stupid?
    - jrimbault 6y ago
      I did not say they are stupid. I'm saying some communities build on pseudo-elitism. It's not stupid to enjoy using a text editor. It's stupid to argue that because it's hard to use (and hard to master) "you're just not getting it". I think the expirement is over and conclusions can be drawn : emacs represent a tiny proportion of text editor's users, not because of a lack of features (is there's one thing missing it won't be for long), but because of what it is and the people and community around it.
      - rglullis 6y ago
        > It's stupid to argue that because it's hard to use (and hard to master) "you're just not getting it". It is also a bad misrepresentation of the point made by the person that you originally quoted. Let me try an analogy: emacs is Olympic-sized pool, 50m long, 5m deep, with a 10m jump platform. It has been in use for decades by all kinds of people. Some new people see some amazing swimmers and divers using that pool and want to join. Problem is, they also don't know how to dive and are still learning to swim so they ask for a nice ladder on the corner and they want the pool to have one end shallow enough for people to stand on. The developer is basically saying: yeah, getting in there is intimidating at first and we can do some improvements to help beginners, but we also need to find a way to get those beginners to get into the training program, train harder and dedicate themselves to diving, otherwise it would just be a waste of time and resources. Oh, and we also need to keep in mind that none of these changes should affect the people that are already training here for years.
      - microcolonel 6y ago
- catblast 6y ago
  You’re being an idiot. https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Modifier-Keys.html https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Mo... C is an abbreviation for <Control>. You can map pretty much any key to any other key, that’s neither here nor there. M is for meta, s is for super, S is for shift, A is for alt, H is for hyper. My control key is mapped at the window manager and terminal level. As far as emacs is concerned it’s control. If I map my R key to emit a control key code... C is still an abbreviation for control.
  - microcolonel 6y ago
    > M is for meta, s is for super, S is for shift, A is for alt, H is for hyper. But if we're going down that road, M is for alt really, and super wasn't always what Xf86 says it is (the windows/command key). The mapping of keys is arbitrary, but the bindings to the symbols are documented and many defaults exist.
    - catblast 6y ago
      No M is for meta. These names predate X let alone XFree86 by many years. The names don’t even come from a Unix system. Even GNU emacs predates XFree86 by 6 years. Your writing implies that Emacs is something like the notepad of Ubuntu. But it’s history is much more extensive than that—- which happens to be one of its unique selling points. Anyway the point regardless of historical context, is that for all sensible people, that capital C is being used as an abbreviation for the word Control. You’re just being a prat correcting people. You’re not even technically correct, you’re just wrong.
neutronicus 6y ago
I think that is wrong actually. I find it harder to scan my eyes over Ctrl+Alt+a than C-M-a (notice that Apple, too, uses single glyphs for modifier keys).
- plorkyeran 6y ago
  I've used macOS for ten years now and I'm still regularly confused by Apple's modifier key glyphs.
  - zozbot234 6y ago
    Those aren't "Apple's glyphs", they're part of the ISO/IEC 9995 standard for common keyboard layouts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_9995 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_9995 Perhaps Emacs and the Linux desktop should start using these characters by default, seeing as they now have good Unicode support.
    - pseudalopex 6y ago
      Control and Option/Alternate are different. Most keyboards and most software don't use either set.

microcolonel 6y ago

> Exactly what I mean. It is insane. I can't get it straight. I really tried years ago. But it is plain and simple stupid. No, you're just being ignorant, and not reading when people try to answer your questions. > Abbreviation is only useful when writing for speed. When writing for reading, don't use them. It's not an abbreviation, it's a different symbol. C is not Ctrl. The software has some “baggage”, being the heir to a 40+ year legacy, but the problems you're ragging on are so shallow that it just tells me you never tried. Why would anyone want to continue holding the hand of somebody who isn't even trying? Emacs is full of excellent documentation, the first thing it tells you when you open it is how to find the documentation, and if you have a mouse you can just click it; if you opened it and decided not to read the intro, but somehow a lot of other people are using it productively, maybe the main problem lies with you. If you're looking for a piece of software that'll give you some sort of religious aesthetic orgasm just looking at it; sure, you'll be let down. If you were trying to get something done and approaching it honestly, these would not be your complaints about Emacs; trust me that there's a lot wrong with it. Having its own slightly different keybinding notation is like... number five thousand on the long list of actual issues with any honest attempt to be productive with Emacs.

jrimbault 6y ago
And yet I could get a few things done in vim in a few minutes, and much more than that in a few weeks. And I choose not to use vim. And yet you said vim has insane key mapping but more people somehow use vim than emacs. Some things are not adding up. Emacs has excellent documentation but somehow very few people are able to use it. Some things are not adding up. Emacs interface and community mannerisms _are_ user-hostile. As demonstrated by history.
- rglullis 6y ago
  Hey, chill. There are lots of things that seem daunting at first and unforgiving to the impatient beginner: chess, surfing, martial arts, drawing... it doesn't mean that any of those are user-hostile, it just means that those that want to learn and master it will need to develop a certain discipline. If you don't want that, fine. But what is the point of going around and saying that those who do enjoy these things are stupid?
  - jrimbault 6y ago
    I did not say they are stupid. I'm saying some communities build on pseudo-elitism. It's not stupid to enjoy using a text editor. It's stupid to argue that because it's hard to use (and hard to master) "you're just not getting it". I think the expirement is over and conclusions can be drawn : emacs represent a tiny proportion of text editor's users, not because of a lack of features (is there's one thing missing it won't be for long), but because of what it is and the people and community around it.
    - rglullis 6y ago
      > It's stupid to argue that because it's hard to use (and hard to master) "you're just not getting it". It is also a bad misrepresentation of the point made by the person that you originally quoted. Let me try an analogy: emacs is Olympic-sized pool, 50m long, 5m deep, with a 10m jump platform. It has been in use for decades by all kinds of people. Some new people see some amazing swimmers and divers using that pool and want to join. Problem is, they also don't know how to dive and are still learning to swim so they ask for a nice ladder on the corner and they want the pool to have one end shallow enough for people to stand on. The developer is basically saying: yeah, getting in there is intimidating at first and we can do some improvements to help beginners, but we also need to find a way to get those beginners to get into the training program, train harder and dedicate themselves to diving, otherwise it would just be a waste of time and resources. Oh, and we also need to keep in mind that none of these changes should affect the people that are already training here for years.
    - microcolonel 6y ago
catblast 6y ago
You’re being an idiot. https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Modifier-Keys.html https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Mo... C is an abbreviation for <Control>. You can map pretty much any key to any other key, that’s neither here nor there. M is for meta, s is for super, S is for shift, A is for alt, H is for hyper. My control key is mapped at the window manager and terminal level. As far as emacs is concerned it’s control. If I map my R key to emit a control key code... C is still an abbreviation for control.
- microcolonel 6y ago
  > M is for meta, s is for super, S is for shift, A is for alt, H is for hyper. But if we're going down that road, M is for alt really, and super wasn't always what Xf86 says it is (the windows/command key). The mapping of keys is arbitrary, but the bindings to the symbols are documented and many defaults exist.
  - catblast 6y ago
    No M is for meta. These names predate X let alone XFree86 by many years. The names don’t even come from a Unix system. Even GNU emacs predates XFree86 by 6 years. Your writing implies that Emacs is something like the notepad of Ubuntu. But it’s history is much more extensive than that—- which happens to be one of its unique selling points. Anyway the point regardless of historical context, is that for all sensible people, that capital C is being used as an abbreviation for the word Control. You’re just being a prat correcting people. You’re not even technically correct, you’re just wrong.

neutronicus 6y ago

I think that is wrong actually. I find it harder to scan my eyes over Ctrl+Alt+a than C-M-a (notice that Apple, too, uses single glyphs for modifier keys).

plorkyeran 6y ago
I've used macOS for ten years now and I'm still regularly confused by Apple's modifier key glyphs.
- zozbot234 6y ago
  Those aren't "Apple's glyphs", they're part of the ISO/IEC 9995 standard for common keyboard layouts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_9995 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_9995 Perhaps Emacs and the Linux desktop should start using these characters by default, seeing as they now have good Unicode support.
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    Control and Option/Alternate are different. Most keyboards and most software don't use either set.