4 ms·

> > I am afraid I'm missing something. > You are not You are missing an entire world treated as text and a consistent and an endlessly configurable interface f

> > I am afraid I'm missing something. > You are not You are missing an entire world treated as text and a consistent and an endlessly configurable interface for everything you can pull into your emacs Borg. See this comment too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23673299 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23673299 Note, many still use emacs for what the GP described and more.

brandonmenc 6y ago
Yes, but you don't like, need that to be, I dunno, a complete programmer or person. Which is how the "cult" (tongue-in-cheek) treats it, and why this person has FOMO. There are tons of examples of programming wizards and productivity gurus who don't use emacs. And you'll encounter lots of people who can't get shit done but who fiddle endlessly with emacs or vi or whatever configs and believe they have some super efficient direct connection from their brain to their computer. Some of the best, most productive programmers I know use notepad, and some of the worst use emacs. ymmv.
- codygman 6y ago
  > Yes, but you don't like, need that to be, I dunno, a complete programmer or person. Yeah? I'm not sure how meaningful this argument is here since you can just get by with nano and a terminal. > Which is how the "cult" (tongue-in-cheek) treats it, and why this person has FOMO. I frequent the places that the "cultists" would most likely be and the prevailing theme is "if your workflow works, keep it, but emacs could do X for you". > There are tons of examples of programming wizards and productivity gurus who don't use emacs. Yeah, but that doesn't mean Emacs wouldn't make them less or more productive. I don't think I've seen the "you need emacs" strawman your arguing against in practice. > And you'll encounter lots of people who can't get shit done but who fiddle endlessly with emacs or vi or whatever configs and believe they have some super efficient direct connection from their brain to their computer. Would those people be more or less productive without emacs? I find answering questions like this for myself difficult, I can't imagine trying to decide others would be better off not using an editor. Isn't saying lots of people exist that would be more productive without the kind of presumption that annoyed you from the Emacs cult? > Some of the best, most productive programmers I know use notepad, and some of the worst use emacs. ymmv. Right, which is why I commented what the other user was missing and not "you need this".

brandonmenc 6y ago

Yes, but you don't like, need that to be, I dunno, a complete programmer or person. Which is how the "cult" (tongue-in-cheek) treats it, and why this person has FOMO. There are tons of examples of programming wizards and productivity gurus who don't use emacs. And you'll encounter lots of people who can't get shit done but who fiddle endlessly with emacs or vi or whatever configs and believe they have some super efficient direct connection from their brain to their computer. Some of the best, most productive programmers I know use notepad, and some of the worst use emacs. ymmv.

codygman 6y ago
> Yes, but you don't like, need that to be, I dunno, a complete programmer or person. Yeah? I'm not sure how meaningful this argument is here since you can just get by with nano and a terminal. > Which is how the "cult" (tongue-in-cheek) treats it, and why this person has FOMO. I frequent the places that the "cultists" would most likely be and the prevailing theme is "if your workflow works, keep it, but emacs could do X for you". > There are tons of examples of programming wizards and productivity gurus who don't use emacs. Yeah, but that doesn't mean Emacs wouldn't make them less or more productive. I don't think I've seen the "you need emacs" strawman your arguing against in practice. > And you'll encounter lots of people who can't get shit done but who fiddle endlessly with emacs or vi or whatever configs and believe they have some super efficient direct connection from their brain to their computer. Would those people be more or less productive without emacs? I find answering questions like this for myself difficult, I can't imagine trying to decide others would be better off not using an editor. Isn't saying lots of people exist that would be more productive without the kind of presumption that annoyed you from the Emacs cult? > Some of the best, most productive programmers I know use notepad, and some of the worst use emacs. ymmv. Right, which is why I commented what the other user was missing and not "you need this".