jfaz1

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by jfaz1 2y ago

   Sure, I get what you mean. Reminds me of the whole "GNU plus Linux" thing. I think it's more a matter of setting expectations, a lot of users come in expecting it to behave like or be compatible with GNU Emacs, when it's
2. 2.▲
   by jfaz1 2y ago

   Sorry, I only recently started contributing and don't really have an answer to your question. I'd venture to say there aren't that many lem devs/"enthusiasts" browsing this thread so I can only speak from my ow
3. 3.▲
   by jfaz1 2y ago

   Hahaha I've seen some pretty nutty maintainers so can't blame you! That being said I can vouch for the guy, he's extremely nice and responsive.
4. 4.▲
   by jfaz1 2y ago

   To be fair, this project is not a CL Emacs. It's a separate editor doing its own thing that happens to share the same keybinds and a few architectural decisions.
5. 5.▲
   by jfaz1 2y ago

   Pretty much. The whole thing (including scripts, packages, configuration, etc.) is written in CL, there's no C core (minus a bit of ffi here and there for e.g. shell interaction). This makes it really easy to modify the editor's s
6. 6.▲
   by jfaz1 2y ago

   Lem has Legit. While missing some features, it works well enough for the daily add/stage/commit loop that makes up 90% of my git commands. It also uses less git commands so it's a fair bit snappier than Magit on large repos.