3 ms·

> articles like this give me FOMO for emacs and lisp and the like, but the learning curve intimidates me Lisp is great and you should learn it. (If you want.)

> articles like this give me FOMO for emacs and lisp and the like, but the learning curve intimidates me Lisp is great and you should learn it. (If you want.) You don't need emacs for that - just find a scheme interpreter in a web browser [0] and start reading SICP [1] until you get bored. That's all the effort you need to get the mind-expanding effect. This approach is also way more fun. If you really like it, move on to a "real" Lisp. > Anyway, I don't think keyboard-based tools for me Honestly, me neither. At least, not the way they were when I used emacs as my "daily driver." Why? Because the MacBook trackpads are so precise and fast that "using the mouse" is no longer an impediment. If you ever try to use a pre-2000 mouse and operating system with their horrible (compared to now) tracking and accuracy, the claim that mice slowed a developer down makes total sense. Nowadays? Not so much. [0] https://inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61a/fa14/assets/interpreter/scheme.html https://inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61a/fa14/assets/interprete... [1] https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/full-text/book/book.html https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/full-text/...

clojureyoureyes 6y ago
> Because the MacBook trackpads are so precise But you to have to know where to click. And that's the biggest problem with so-called "modern" UIs - it lacks discoverability. Either you memorize all menus and dialogs, or you have to seek out the functionality you need each time you can't remember anything. And sometimes these dialogs change, so you have to rediscover everything once again. In Emacs, it's enough only to remember basic movement shortcuts. The rest of commands could be discovered easily with M-x and which-keys. > You don't need emacs for that - just find a scheme interpreter in a web browser [0] and start reading SICP [1] until you get bored. That's all the effort you need to get the mind-expanding effect. One of the main reasons I moved to Emacs (11 years ago) was Common Lisp and SLIME. > If you really like it, move on to a "real" Lisp. A real(world) Lisp is Clojure these days
- brandonmenc 6y ago
  > In Emacs, it's enough only to remember basic movement shortcuts. The rest of commands could be discovered easily with M-x and which-keys. afaik every modern IDE has this discoverability functionality. I use shift-shift and control-control autocomplete command menus all the time in JetBrains.

clojureyoureyes 6y ago

> Because the MacBook trackpads are so precise But you to have to know where to click. And that's the biggest problem with so-called "modern" UIs - it lacks discoverability. Either you memorize all menus and dialogs, or you have to seek out the functionality you need each time you can't remember anything. And sometimes these dialogs change, so you have to rediscover everything once again. In Emacs, it's enough only to remember basic movement shortcuts. The rest of commands could be discovered easily with M-x and which-keys. > You don't need emacs for that - just find a scheme interpreter in a web browser [0] and start reading SICP [1] until you get bored. That's all the effort you need to get the mind-expanding effect. One of the main reasons I moved to Emacs (11 years ago) was Common Lisp and SLIME. > If you really like it, move on to a "real" Lisp. A real(world) Lisp is Clojure these days

brandonmenc 6y ago
> In Emacs, it's enough only to remember basic movement shortcuts. The rest of commands could be discovered easily with M-x and which-keys. afaik every modern IDE has this discoverability functionality. I use shift-shift and control-control autocomplete command menus all the time in JetBrains.