4 ms·
I mean, pure emacs nerds just use eshell or similar. Then the keybindings match 100% and things like "more" get turned into "open this in a buffer" etc. Though
by cmrdporcupine 3y ago
I mean, pure emacs nerds just use eshell or similar. Then the keybindings match 100% and things like "more" get turned into "open this in a buffer" etc. Though you give up full bash compatibility. but there's "shell" if you want bash (or zsh for that matter) inside emacs itself, without the fancy stuff eshell gives you.
I've never fully made this transition, but have at times played with it, when I've been feeling extra-emacs-excited.
https://www.masteringemacs.org/article/running-shells-in-emacs-overview https://www.masteringemacs.org/article/running-shells-in-ema...
- soraminazuki 3y agoEshell is neat, and I especially like the TRAMP integration. But I've yet to see anyone completely replace their terminal with it though. There are some usability problems like company mode hanging Emacs on every key input when used with Eshell on remote directories. Also, Emacs in general can't replace tabbed terminals because there are so many blocking operations that make it unresponsive for a while.
- cmrdporcupine 3y agoYeah, makes sense. And the blocking unresponsive thing, I guess I'm just flabbergasted we're still here after all these years. I know every few months there's a new "I'm rewriting emacs/something-like-emacs" and it's, yeah, a nogo. But I'd actually just really like it if someone really really tried and addressed some of the architecture things :-(