5 ms·

> most are kinda opinionated non-essential tweaks "That's just like uh… your opinion man." —"The Big Lebowski", I think ;-) I'm mostly of the opinion that van

> most are kinda opinionated non-essential tweaks "That's just like uh… your opinion man." —"The Big Lebowski", I think ;-) I'm mostly of the opinion that vanilla Emacs has some bad opinions with regards to discoverability and ease-of-use-for-newbies, which is what this starter kit is targeting. CUA-mode is on because without it you're gonna have newbies footgunning themselves super hard right out the gate, and that's the biggest thing I want to avoid. If you consider this setup opinionated, then great—I'll embrace that. :) I think they're the kind of opinions that help newbies. > ergoemacs Are you referring to Xah Lee's stuff? Or something else? I'd love to see what you're referring to—please send me a link here or on my contact page. That said, Xah himself said at one point that `cua-mode` should be on by default,[1] so I think it's good enough for this kit. [1]: http://xahlee.info/emacs/emacs/modernization.html http://xahlee.info/emacs/emacs/modernization.html

geokon 3y ago
yeah Xah Lee's ergoemacs. You should give it a try. I don't think we disagree. cua-mode is better than nothing.. but just enabling CUA feels kinda lazy bc it's easily improved from Xah Lee himself： http://xahlee.info/emacs/emacs/modernization_cua-mode.html http://xahlee.info/emacs/emacs/modernization_cua-mode.html
- ashton314 3y ago
  Ah, ok. Thanks for the link—I'll take a look at this and see if I can make it better. Thank you again!
lproven 3y ago
> I'd love to see what you're referring to There is Google, you know. https://ergoemacs.github.io/ https://ergoemacs.github.io/ It's the biggest thing to happen to Emacs in 30 years. That is presumably why all the beardies ignore it. I used to know 20-30 totally different editors. That all went away circa 1990 when the CUA UI swept the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Common_User_Access https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Common_User_Access All late-era DOS stuff, and Windows >= 3.x, Mac OS X and ~all Linux GUIs are compliant. I refuse to learn any other editor UI. Life is too short. Comply with CUA, or die in a fire.
- lycopodiopsida 3y ago
  >It's the biggest thing to happen to Emacs in 30 years. That is presumably why all the beardies ignore it. Clearly bearing the costs of a wrong decision - learn vim keybindings 30 years ago, and use it in every popular editor and ide, including emacs, ever since. Only half-joking.
  - lproven 3y ago
    :-) That's sort of the point. I learned all those editors (VMS EDT and RPED and LocoScript and Edlin and WordStar and WordPerfect and DisplayWrite and MultiMate and loads of BASIC editors, including the very strange RISC OS one, with two independent cursors) before I ever saw Vi for the first time, which was on SCO Xenix in about 1989 or so. Vi was just another weird editor to me, a supercharged Edlin and you'd have to be mad to love Edlin. So I learned the bare rudiments and moved on. Then a wave of standardisation happened across the industry, and I surfed it and it was great. Suddenly all mainstream editors used the same UI and it was so much easier. Then [record scratch, fast forward] in 2014 I got a job in a Linux vendor and discovered all these rabid Vim enthusiasts in the 21st century. I was amazed. Later I got a job in a _different_ Linux vendor, where we had a significant presences of Emacs fans. I never thought I'd meet keen Vi(m) users who weren't born yet when MS-DOS 5 got a full screen editor. I thought all that nastiness had gone away. So, yes, there are these 2 camps who learned one set of UI, way back when, and love it: Vi users and Emacs users. I am not saying either is wrong. But there is another camp that doesn't know it's a camp: the millions of unknowing CUA users. Emacs is meant to be the ultimate in configurability. Well configure it to look like an editor from the 1990s instead of the 1970s, and I'll try it. But I'm not learning another new 1970s editor now, after 40 years of this stuff. Hard no. I am not a programmer. I don't care how good it is for programmers. I write human language. I need an editor for that: Markdown, these days, mainly.
    - lycopodiopsida 3y ago
      The millions of unknowing CUA users don't know or use any keybindings - they just click, scroll and select with a mouse. Arguably, it is also what made CUA the worst option - there is just no selection pressure from users, no complains is something is not working properly. Vim keybindings are so well supported compared to the share of users because vim users care. I would also agree, that vim keybindings shine for programming, less for prose where one would be all the time in insert mode anyway. Emacs, oh, readline keybindings are less supported in general, but can be found in the most unexpected places - text fields and editors in macOS, console terminals. Now, CUA - I would not even know which editor I should use it with - some amount is supported everywhere, but there is not a lot overlap between let's say windows and macOS, so I would put this idea into a box with a label "Had some clear influence on things we use, but is mostly dead".

geokon 3y ago

yeah Xah Lee's ergoemacs. You should give it a try. I don't think we disagree. cua-mode is better than nothing.. but just enabling CUA feels kinda lazy bc it's easily improved from Xah Lee himself： http://xahlee.info/emacs/emacs/modernization_cua-mode.html http://xahlee.info/emacs/emacs/modernization_cua-mode.html

ashton314 3y ago
Ah, ok. Thanks for the link—I'll take a look at this and see if I can make it better. Thank you again!

lproven 3y ago

> I'd love to see what you're referring to There is Google, you know. https://ergoemacs.github.io/ https://ergoemacs.github.io/ It's the biggest thing to happen to Emacs in 30 years. That is presumably why all the beardies ignore it. I used to know 20-30 totally different editors. That all went away circa 1990 when the CUA UI swept the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Common_User_Access https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Common_User_Access All late-era DOS stuff, and Windows >= 3.x, Mac OS X and ~all Linux GUIs are compliant. I refuse to learn any other editor UI. Life is too short. Comply with CUA, or die in a fire.

lycopodiopsida 3y ago
>It's the biggest thing to happen to Emacs in 30 years. That is presumably why all the beardies ignore it. Clearly bearing the costs of a wrong decision - learn vim keybindings 30 years ago, and use it in every popular editor and ide, including emacs, ever since. Only half-joking.
- lproven 3y ago
  :-) That's sort of the point. I learned all those editors (VMS EDT and RPED and LocoScript and Edlin and WordStar and WordPerfect and DisplayWrite and MultiMate and loads of BASIC editors, including the very strange RISC OS one, with two independent cursors) before I ever saw Vi for the first time, which was on SCO Xenix in about 1989 or so. Vi was just another weird editor to me, a supercharged Edlin and you'd have to be mad to love Edlin. So I learned the bare rudiments and moved on. Then a wave of standardisation happened across the industry, and I surfed it and it was great. Suddenly all mainstream editors used the same UI and it was so much easier. Then [record scratch, fast forward] in 2014 I got a job in a Linux vendor and discovered all these rabid Vim enthusiasts in the 21st century. I was amazed. Later I got a job in a _different_ Linux vendor, where we had a significant presences of Emacs fans. I never thought I'd meet keen Vi(m) users who weren't born yet when MS-DOS 5 got a full screen editor. I thought all that nastiness had gone away. So, yes, there are these 2 camps who learned one set of UI, way back when, and love it: Vi users and Emacs users. I am not saying either is wrong. But there is another camp that doesn't know it's a camp: the millions of unknowing CUA users. Emacs is meant to be the ultimate in configurability. Well configure it to look like an editor from the 1990s instead of the 1970s, and I'll try it. But I'm not learning another new 1970s editor now, after 40 years of this stuff. Hard no. I am not a programmer. I don't care how good it is for programmers. I write human language. I need an editor for that: Markdown, these days, mainly.
  - lycopodiopsida 3y ago
    The millions of unknowing CUA users don't know or use any keybindings - they just click, scroll and select with a mouse. Arguably, it is also what made CUA the worst option - there is just no selection pressure from users, no complains is something is not working properly. Vim keybindings are so well supported compared to the share of users because vim users care. I would also agree, that vim keybindings shine for programming, less for prose where one would be all the time in insert mode anyway. Emacs, oh, readline keybindings are less supported in general, but can be found in the most unexpected places - text fields and editors in macOS, console terminals. Now, CUA - I would not even know which editor I should use it with - some amount is supported everywhere, but there is not a lot overlap between let's say windows and macOS, so I would put this idea into a box with a label "Had some clear influence on things we use, but is mostly dead".