It's simply impossible to become as quick in Emacs as one might be in vim. I've been trying, I've really been trying hard to like Emacs, because I want a decent IDE for Lisp. But it's just terrible. The editor is always getting in my way.
I have a new purpose in life. To clone vim in Common Lisp. This isn't reinventing the wheel, because whatever vi-mode they have in Emacs is still corrupted. A new viitor must surface, pure and handsome, with all the Lisp-friendliness of Emacs and all the awesomeness of vi.
>>80
Sorry to disappoint you, but OP is talking about Lisp, and most developers that develop write lisp use Emacs. I learned Emacs because I wanted to develop in CL.
P.S: I only posted in this thread once.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-17 20:31
>>78,79
Stop trying to make this argument wider than it actually is. I'm not arguing against extensibility, nor do I hold any views against metaprogramming. I'm arguing against programming Emacs to mimic a certain style of text-editing, an idea which apparently is appealing to you. To me, it seems pointless.
>>82
I wasn't trying to mimic the style of vi (even if I did there is VIPER mode), I merely stated that if I wanted that particular function I would add it.
>>83
That's kind of an impasse, because both emacs and vi are very extensible. You might as well both write your own editor from the grounds up, and then sit and shout at each other that "if I wanted that feature I'd just write it."
>>84
Indeed, as I said earlier, vi and emacs are actually very similar. I move that we end this discussion and pick on the gedit users, who's with me ;)
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-17 20:46
Shaving keystrokes off a task the speed of which is not bound by typing is pointless.
Implying that emacs users think slower than vi users.
I really don't know why all Vim tutorials emphasize hjkl so much
It's a lot more convenient than reaching for the arrow keys, and unlike emacs, you can also operate them with one hand. Countless times I've scrolled through files with my right hand while doing something else with my left.
>>86 It's a lot more convenient than reaching for the arrow keys, and unlike emacs, you can also operate them with one hand.
I already said I don't mind the emacs navigation keys, but I do agree with you that vim is rather convenient in this aspect. Quite a few major modes steal this and I am happy they do.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-18 6:10
>>56
You're an idiot. Did you maybe stop to think that Emacs commands seem hard to remember to you because you don't use Emacs enough to be enlightened?
Emacs is a programmer's tool and therefore is fair discussion in this board.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-18 8:46
in after Vim being superior
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-18 12:32
>>53 Shaving keystrokes off a task the speed of which is not bound by typing is pointless.
Good programmers are of course bound by typing. I agree with >>86. I am very proficient in vim, and my programming productivity is still quite limited by the speed at which I can pour my thoughts into the computer. This is why I have lots of little scripts and binds to automate boilerplate and refactoring, and this is why I use vim.
And before you say it, yes, I agree that you should spend more time thinking and designing than actually coding. This time for good developers happens away from the keyboard.
If you don't find that all editors have barriers to your productivity, then you must just be a hugely unproductive programmer.
>>119
I use a happy hacking keyboard, so mod-keys are sparse.
Plus I like my mod keys to be symmetric and I have yet to find a decent keyboard that looks like [a][b][c][space][c][b][a].