[HN Gopher] Batteries included with Emacs
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Batteries included with Emacs
        
       Author : e3bc54b2
       Score  : 223 points
       Date   : 2021-11-25 15:33 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (karthinks.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (karthinks.com)
        
       | fermentation wrote:
       | I've always wanted to get into emacs, but I only have enough room
       | in my life for a single set of keybinds, and vim has taken that
       | spot. A lot of the emacs-for-vim-people projects are these huge
       | distributions and when something breaks I have no idea how to fix
       | it. Do any of you have a good resource for learning emacs from
       | the ground up, but with vim keybinds?
        
         | acheron9383 wrote:
         | Honestly, to just get moving, installing Doom emacs and
         | selecting evil mode during setup. The basic keybinds are all
         | Vim then, works great for me with minimal headache.
        
         | throw10920 wrote:
         | I started using vim before switching to emacs, and my
         | experience was that just installing evil-mode and then picking
         | up any normal emacs tutorial was enough - I skipped all of the
         | editing specific stuff and got the interesting stuff from the
         | rest. You might want to try that.
         | 
         | Actually, your question made me realize that the interesting
         | part of vim is the modal editing interface, while the
         | interesting part of emacs is everything _but_ the text editing
         | bits. So, focus on those.
         | 
         | Does that help, or have you already tried this?
        
         | cpach wrote:
         | Some pointers that might be useful:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLGP2UnPoZ7HzLGU2cyK1M...
         | 
         | https://github.com/noctuid/evil-guide
         | 
         | https://www.spacemacs.org/doc/VIMUSERS.html
         | 
         | Best of luck!
        
       | worik wrote:
       | For me the killer aspect of Emacs (it applies even more to vi) is
       | being able to use it in a terminal so being able to use it over a
       | network connection.
       | 
       | I know X can export over a network connection, but text mode
       | Emacs is much simpler and does not require X.
        
       | submeta wrote:
       | After spending endless hours in learning the ins and outs of
       | Emacs and starting to learn Elisp, I come to realize that Emacs'
       | tinkering-to-doing ratio is too high. I need tools that get out
       | of my way. Emacs can get a hobby or an obsession. If you have
       | nothing else to do, fine, spend your time sharpening the saw
       | instead of cutting wood.
       | 
       | I turned to VS Code + PyCharm for coding. And use Emacs for
       | editing text only. And for that, it is excellent.
       | 
       | What I love about Emacs most is the macro recorder. Whenever I
       | have to transform text, I record my steps in Emacs' macro
       | recorder and replay the steps. That's like magic. I wouldn't even
       | bother writing a Python script for these one-off transformations.
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | > I come to realize that Emacs' tinkering-to-doing ratio is too
         | high.
         | 
         | You are in full control of how much tinkering you do, though.
         | Strange to blame a tool for this.
        
           | tom_ wrote:
           | But most of the things you do require a certain amount of
           | tinkering, even basic stuff like setting up C indentation,
           | making Emacs not use tabs, and configuring keyboard shortcuts
           | - especially in the early days, when you might not quite
           | understand how things fit together.
           | 
           | Compare and contrast with Visual Studio Code, which has a
           | much smoother onboarding experience.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | Agreed about the onboarding experience. However, the person
             | I was replying to seems quite well versed in Emacs.
        
       | Blackthorn wrote:
       | Oh damn, I had no idea about undo-in-region. That's so convenient
       | and it comes with Emacs stock. Wish I knew about that years ago.
        
       | Mikeb85 wrote:
       | Honestly, I never really had that much love for Emacs until
       | relatively recently. I've always dabbled due to it generally
       | having good support for most languages (including esoteric ones)
       | but recently I got into it a lot more due to the fact that many
       | of the new-ish OSS editors but Emacs has always been there and
       | likely will always be there.
       | 
       | A few years back I got into Atom quite a bit since it checked all
       | the boxes: extensible, open source, and it was very nice. Then
       | VSCode killed it. And it seems more and more that VSCode is
       | taking over, all the while inserting more proprietary code to the
       | point where half the 'big' plugins don't work on Codium, only the
       | proprietary MS distribution.
       | 
       | So I got back into Emacs but really worked on my environment.
       | Stopped dabbling and started just forcing myself to use it. And
       | it's honestly amazing. It checks off every box available in
       | VSCode and more. And it's nice knowing that it'll always be
       | there. I'm not against proprietary software per-se, but I
       | definitely don't have a lot of trust in Microsoft.
        
         | quotemstr wrote:
         | And thanks to recent developments in cross-editor
         | infrastructure projects like tree-sitter and LSP, editors like
         | VSCode, Emacs, Sublime Tex, and even public nuisances like vim
         | can all advance at the same time and benefit from each other's
         | development work in areas where the editors aren't
         | differentiated.
         | 
         | We're very close to a world in which we don't have N
         | implementations of finding the start of a C function or
         | figuring out what parts of a Python buffer are keywords.
        
           | lc9er wrote:
           | > even public nuisances like vim.
           | 
           | I love vim (err... Neovim), and this was great.
        
             | agumonkey wrote:
             | we all love vim, especially to mock it absurdly
        
               | smitty1e wrote:
               | Spacemacs is bee's knees.
        
           | pronik wrote:
           | Somehow, Microsoft managed to invent LSP for VSCode and then
           | abandon some parts of it just a couple of years later -- e.g.
           | python language server is dead, pylance is there instead,
           | closed source, VSCode-specific and with prohibitive license.
           | Most language plugins in VSCode don't use LSP anymore IIRC.
        
         | throw10920 wrote:
         | One of the (several) unfortunate things about Atom being killed
         | by VSCode was that its extension model was much closer to that
         | of Emacs - everything ran in the main editor process - far more
         | flexible than VSCode, but also with the mass-market appeal of
         | JavaScript.
         | 
         | (yeah, that model led to poor performance, but afaict that's a
         | combination of (a) just JS things and (b) not putting any
         | effort into the design)
         | 
         | > I definitely don't have a lot of trust in Microsoft.
         | 
         | Very wise, given the user-hostile stuff they've been doing in
         | Windows recently...
        
           | smallnamespace wrote:
           | > (a) just JS things and (b) not putting any effort into the
           | design
           | 
           | This feels a bit self-contradictory, since one might argue a
           | properly designed extension API must include process
           | isolation, so naively-written extensions can't mess up the
           | main loop. VS Code extensions are also in JS.
           | 
           | This is the same problem that, say, preemptive multitasking
           | solves, and why Windows 3.1 crashed much more than '95 and
           | XP.
        
         | rvieira wrote:
         | I'm also a recent Emacs enthusiast. Many many years ago, I
         | never felt productive with the navigation and keys.
         | 
         | Then, recently, I _really_ wanted to try org and thought "I'll
         | force myself to use it". I started with Evil mode and Doom. I
         | was blown away tbh. What I thought to be an "old" tool that
         | would slow me down, is actually a massive booster (and fun!).
         | My personal experience, of course.
        
       | dylan604 wrote:
       | Batteries may be included, but some assembly is definitely
       | required in learning all of the commands to make it useful.
       | 
       | I'm sure vim and emacs were great tools back when monochrome
       | monitors were all that were available. But with modern UI IDEs
       | and what not, I only use vim when need to make fast and dirty
       | changes directly on the server. I do find all of things that can
       | be done in emacs/vim quite impressive, but I'm also quite happy
       | that it is not the tool I have to use because nothing else is
       | available.
       | 
       | I do find myself getting environments backwards in my head though
       | when flipping back and forth quickly. Like typing :wq in my IDE,
       | or cmd-s in vim when prompts my terminal to save my session.
        
       | bloopernova wrote:
       | I've been using Emacs for about 4 years now, and some of the
       | stuff on this list was news to me. Thank you, OP, for sharing
       | this; I found it useful!
        
         | Kototama wrote:
         | Same, more than 10 years and I really should have known M-\
         | earlier :-) (or remembered it, I think I read about it
         | earlier).
         | 
         | The thing is with Emacs, you can really optimize every key
         | stroke if you want, but usually I'm too busy using it to
         | program so I optimize the workflow only time to time.
        
       | ripe wrote:
       | For people who ask, "why use text-only editors like vim or Emacs,
       | when I can use a full GUI IDE?":
       | 
       | One of the reasons I haven't seen mentioned much is: I'm a touch
       | typist, and I hate having to switch between mouse and keyboard! I
       | have to take my attention off the screen. Slows me down. Disturbs
       | my concentration.
       | 
       | With Emacs, I can work for hours without ever having to hunt for
       | the mouse, or without even having a mouse plugged in. That's
       | particularly nice for using my Ubuntu laptop on a lap desk,
       | leaning back in my armchair. The best mouse is no mouse at all.
       | 
       | Yes, I know many IDEs have shortcut keys for some commands, but
       | the basic assumption with GUI applications is that you have a
       | mouse. Even if you learn the shortcuts, somehow you always end up
       | having to use the mouse for some common task, e.g., to select a
       | paragraph. That's why I never got to like a GUI IDE, despite
       | having had to use Eclipse for years.
        
         | arkaic wrote:
         | On your last point, in terms of absolute speed, pointing your
         | mouse to the paragraph and dragging to highlight is usually
         | faster than the fussiness of multiple key presses and/or chord
         | combos needed from a full keyboard setup. That is, unless
         | you've macro'd a custom single key shortcut for just that
         | particular action
        
         | xhevahir wrote:
         | I just started using VS Code a lot last weekend and I didn't
         | find myself using my trackpad much. The Vim plugin, whatever
         | it's called, allowed me to do the same things I do in Vim
         | itself. I can't speak to the Emacs emulation, though, now that
         | I think about it.
        
         | b3morales wrote:
         | Also a keyboardist, and you can pry my emacs from my cold dead
         | fingers, but I still think it would benefit from a bit more
         | ability to incorporate platform-appropriate keyboard-driven GUI
         | widgets/arbitrary drawing. For example, if the minibuffer could
         | look like a regular GUI text field + a drop-down menu, or a
         | floating command palette, I genuinely think it would be a nicer
         | experience (and would make it "look more modern" which is not a
         | terrible thing)1. Similarly for the mode line and fringes. If
         | some of the peripheral elements could be enabled to escape the
         | "everything is a grid of characters" paradigm I think it would
         | be a net positive.
         | 
         | 1I've tried mini-frame, and it's fine, but it's still just a
         | utilitarian grid of text.
        
         | chlorion wrote:
         | It's worth mentioning that Emacs is not a text-only editor, but
         | is able to function in a text only environment if configured
         | to. I think many people never consider giving Emacs a shot
         | because they think it's purely a terminal based program.
         | 
         | Modern Emacs can be (and mostly is) compiled with GTK support
         | and features a GTK interface, but can be launched in text-mode
         | with a command line argument. If you don't mind using bleeding
         | edge versions, there is a branch called "PGTK" that allows the
         | GTK interface to run natively on Wayland!
        
           | Mikeb85 wrote:
           | > If you don't mind using bleeding edge versions, there is a
           | branch called "PGTK" that allows the GTK interface to run
           | natively on Wayland!
           | 
           | The two biggest Linux distros (Ubuntu and Fedora) are Wayland
           | by default now. And the 'standard' Emacs distribution you
           | install through the Software 'store' in both is GTK (which of
           | course works). Wayland support isn't really a big deal
           | anymore. I haven't come across any apps that don't work on
           | Wayland.
        
             | d_tr wrote:
             | Yeah, it is GTK but not _pure_ GTK! It uses X11 drawing
             | calls for some elements so it needs XWayland on Wayland.
             | Pure GTK might be coming with Emacs 28 by the way.
        
         | epolanski wrote:
         | To add to this: yes, full blown IDEs have shortcuts but they
         | are hard to explore, counter-intuitive and hard to extend.
        
         | lawn wrote:
         | I find it amazing how common it is for programmers to not be
         | touch typists (I mean typing without looking at the keys).
         | Like, isn't that something you pick up by the sheer amount of
         | keyboard time?
        
           | edgyquant wrote:
           | I can type without looking but I still have trouble placing
           | my fingers over the keyboard in the right initial place so
           | I'll often start a little off and I type so fast that I'll
           | type half a dozen characters before I realize and have to
           | correct.
        
             | Mikeb85 wrote:
             | Most keyboards have a little raised bump on the F and J
             | keys ;)
        
               | wrycoder wrote:
               | I once subscribed to a magazine and received the
               | subscription at my address, but with a strange name. I
               | took me a minute to realize that it had been touch typed,
               | but with the right hand displaced to the right by one
               | position.
        
           | mabub24 wrote:
           | Most people get by with pseudo-touch typing. They have most
           | of the speed down, and look down at the keyboard
           | occasionally, but they do not have the accuracy that is
           | displayed in true touch-typing.
        
             | bitexploder wrote:
             | That sort of blows my mind. How can you not learn to touch
             | type? It will take you a month at most and it greatly
             | improves life at a keyboard.
        
               | pronik wrote:
               | Depends on what you mean by "touch-type". I can type
               | without looking in three keyboard layouts, but that comes
               | through a lot of keyboard time (and a lot of Police Quest
               | I), so that I'm unable to use split keyboards because my
               | right hand is overreaching to the left half of the
               | keyboard. I also ignore home-row dancing, specific finger
               | positions etc. I can type fast and blind, but I don't
               | think I would qualify as a classical touch-typist.
        
               | phist_mcgee wrote:
               | Because not everyone has time to dedicate to a skill with
               | diminishing returns after a certain point, and on top of
               | that many people do not at all care about the life of
               | their keyboard.
               | 
               | I touch-type, but still occasionally struggle with some
               | things eg. using the right shift key instead of always
               | preferring the left. I don't see much benefit in
               | addressing this, since my typing speed is never the
               | blocker with regard to my programming output.
        
               | smallnamespace wrote:
               | I'm eternally grateful for Mrs. Walker's 2nd grade class,
               | where they shoved us in a room full of Apple 2e's and
               | made us play a typing game (and if you finished, you got
               | to play Oregon Trail). I'm a bit surprised/disappointed
               | that touch typing isn't universally taught in school.
        
               | bitexploder wrote:
               | Isn't it distracting to have to look and visually think
               | about the keyboard in the midst of working? Genuinely
               | asking. I literally can't imagine having to look at the
               | keyboard. And how much of a commitment is it really?
        
               | garretraziel wrote:
               | To be honest, in programming, the speed of writing on
               | keyboard itself isn't the most limiting factor during
               | development. I've forced myself to learn to touch type
               | (not fully, I don't press spacebar with a thumb of
               | opposing hand as last letter written, I also almost
               | exclusively use left shift), but that doesn't make me a
               | fastest programmer around. Development looks more like "I
               | type two words, I look at the screen for 10 seconds, I
               | type one symbol, I look at the screens for 5 seconds, I
               | type one word". Touch typing helps with that, but IMHO
               | isn't really that important.
        
           | epolanski wrote:
           | Touch typing isn't about writing without looking at the keys,
           | that's something that pretty much every dev I know does. It's
           | about writing in an efficient way that minimizes finger
           | travel, and zeroes palm and writ movement.
           | 
           | There's a reason F and J have bumps on them, or why we have
           | two shifts, etc.
           | 
           | For anyone interested into relearning how to type efficiently
           | I want to recommend this free website full of tutorials and
           | exercises: https://www.typingclub.com/
        
           | Mikeb85 wrote:
           | I'm not that old (30's) but we were forced into learning how
           | to touch-type throughout grade-school. Pretty much any white-
           | collar work requires it. Getting through university basically
           | requires it (even humanities courses; good luck writing long
           | essays without it). It's shocking that anyone who went
           | through school in a developed country can't touch-type.
        
             | BlueTemplar wrote:
             | You're assuming that most of the writing is done on
             | computers - but depending on the discipline - it isn't :
             | computers aren't nowhere nearly good enough to compete with
             | paper / chalk (/ even whiteboard !) when it comes to
             | mathematics-heavy domains.
        
               | Mikeb85 wrote:
               | Pure maths is a pretty small niche. The vast majority of
               | while collar work, university students, etc...,
               | definitely type and use computers constantly.
        
           | Y_Y wrote:
           | Yes, but I often work with different keyboards. The place I
           | live has a couple of different stupid local variations, and
           | then if I have an Anglosphere keyboard it's 50-50 between UK
           | and US. Sometimes I change the "layout" and type as if I'm on
           | a different keyboard, but usually the keys don't even
           | physically match up. Then there are different types of
           | keyboard, from super-compact to full numpad monsters and from
           | chiclet to hefty mechanical, and then there's my shitty
           | touchscreen phone.
           | 
           | I'd love to be able to type from muscle memory, but the
           | keyboards keep changing!
        
           | fhd2 wrote:
           | I literally trained the correct technique as a child because
           | I was so into computers. I'd argue children today are far
           | less exposed to keyboards than people (well, nerds) my age
           | were.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | edgyquant wrote:
             | Maybe but I've typing since I was a kid on a Windows 95 and
             | I still only know the gist of the keyboard and have to look
             | down and correct myself every minute or so, so I don't
             | that's they only reason. I actually think that typing
             | without looking isn't as important as people used to say it
             | was for speed.
        
               | wizzwizz4 wrote:
               | Just memorising the order of the keys from left-to-right,
               | top-to-bottom, and reciting it, was enough for me never
               | to have to look down. I have no idea why or how; I assume
               | it's something to do with dreaming.
        
               | wrycoder wrote:
               | It would be an interesting experiment to have one group
               | do that before teaching both groups to touch type. Then
               | measure the speed and accuracy of both groups.
        
           | zdragnar wrote:
           | I'm a touch typist, but emacs chords always bothered me. I
           | feel much more content switching to mouse or track pad for
           | things like switching tabs, picking files from a file tree to
           | copy / paste or duplicate or whatever, etc.
           | 
           | That said, being a programmer and not touch typing definitely
           | sounds odd to me as well
        
             | ced wrote:
             | _emacs chords always bothered me_
             | 
             | I got carpal tunnels a few years back from emacs, which
             | forced me to try https://ergoemacs.github.io/ . I like it a
             | lot, it's more sensibly designed. I've found it a pain to
             | install though...
        
               | smitty1e wrote:
               | Spacemacs has saved me.
        
             | convolvatron wrote:
             | unfortunately I can only really work for long stretches on
             | a kinesis split keyboard - with the modifiers all the on
             | the thumb. if they would finally make a bluetooth one maybe
             | that wouldn't be so bad.
        
               | xhevahir wrote:
               | I just got an email about a 20% off sale they're having,
               | and I was tempted. Still expensive, though, seeing as how
               | there's so many new ergonomic designs available from
               | smaller companies.
        
             | someguydave wrote:
             | remapping caps lock to control helped me with emacs chords
        
       | pama wrote:
       | Some of the very recently upgraded batteries in standard emacs
       | include describe-bindings (C-h b gives a neatly organized,
       | foldable output that greatly enhances discoverability) and emoji-
       | insert that uses a neat selection interface.
        
         | wrycoder wrote:
         | 326 lines long!
        
         | Y_Y wrote:
         | For discoverability I love using helm with M-x (or SPC-SPC). I
         | just think of a function I might like to call, like "git fetch"
         | or "sort lines" or "render latex inline" or anything else, and
         | pretty quickly I can figure out what it's called and what its
         | shortcut is for next time. I take for granted that it exists.
        
       | inetsee wrote:
       | I love emacs because of org-mode. I have sometimes wondered
       | whether emacs can do something I have often wanted. I write
       | poetry. If you write with pencil on paper the edit marks (line
       | through, move text, insert) let you see the evolution of a work.
       | It's hard to get the same effect with a text editor. After
       | reading this web post I went searching for "emacs edit history"
       | and I discovered "undo-tree". This is a perfect functionality for
       | my use case, and another reason for me to love emacs.
        
       | fhd2 wrote:
       | Some cool stuff I had no idea exists! But I can't see anything I
       | feel like picking up, I do like to keep it simple. I switched to
       | Emacs after something like six years as a vim user, primarily for
       | the more beginner friendly key bindings so my coworkers wouldn't
       | get _too_ freaked out. Many of the navigation shortcuts work in
       | most shells and even all text fields in macOS out of the box too!
       | 
       | I did implement all kinds of funky customisations at first, but
       | in the last years I stuck mostly to what comes with Emacs, and
       | customize over writing Elisp. I do some work in IntelliJ and
       | Xcode out of necessity, but there's nothing quite as productive
       | for me as vanilla Emacs and ansi-term. It's all just text - and
       | mastering how to deal with text doesn't take that long, and is
       | fairly universal.
       | 
       | One of my favourite and most trivial habits is to use
       | forward/backward search extensively for navigating around a file.
        
       | stinos wrote:
       | Perhaps not the right thread, but: is there anything like 'follow
       | mode' in other editors like Sublime Text/VSCode/Visual Studio
       | editor? I'm now emulating that with e.g. 'new view into file'
       | followed by manually scrolling. Having that autoamtic can be
       | really handy.
        
       | baby wrote:
       | I'm wondering if a vscode in the terminal could ever exist.
        
         | dotancohen wrote:
         | That's like wondering if elephants could ever roam the depths
         | of the oceans. If they did, they would no longer be elephants.
         | 
         | What specific features of vscode would you like to see in a
         | terminal editor?
        
           | Eelongate wrote:
           | Elephants can walk underwater using their trunks as snorkels.
           | Maybe they would be too buoyant for it in sea water. It seems
           | a fair thing to wonder though.
        
           | cmroanirgo wrote:
           | About 15yrs ago I had a nice vim vs vstudio competition with
           | a friend. It started with "look what vim can do"... block
           | select, block indent, bookmarks, etc Vstudio (& now /vscode)
           | can do too. Vim was always slower (mainly bc the guy wasn't
           | seasoned by 10yrs of it) to figure it out. The interesting
           | thing is that vstudio has the same abilities, but for the
           | really arcane stuff (which vim users take as why it's
           | better), can be done too, but just more keystrokes. Lots of
           | the everyday stuff is often the same or fewer keystrokes than
           | vim. And you can always write a macro for edge cases.
           | 
           | So to me, the "win" of vstudio is the tiny command pallete
           | that is used & the shortcuts are displayed in menus. (&
           | everyone mentions the difficult hill to climb to learn emacs
           | or vim by comparison).
           | 
           | The thing which will never work in terminal is ctrl-c and
           | ctrl-v. (Macos covers this nicely by using cmd-... tho). It's
           | a shame.
           | 
           | I actually use le editor in terminal, but am rather cramped
           | using it. I consider learning vim or emacs once every few
           | years... and go... nah, no thanks.
           | 
           | Eg. There are a few comments above about region undo. In
           | vstudio it sounds ugly, but it's trivially easy. Press and
           | hold undo (ctrl-z) and let key repeat until the block appears
           | as you want. Select it, copy. Press and hold redo. Select
           | area. Paste.
           | 
           | Tastes are different.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | jorams wrote:
             | > The thing which will never work in terminal is ctrl-c and
             | ctrl-v.
             | 
             | If you enable cua-mode in Emacs, C-c and C-v work perfectly
             | fine as copy and paste. Even in the terminal.
             | 
             | > There are a few comments above about region undo. In
             | vstudio it sounds ugly, but it's trivially easy. Press and
             | hold undo (ctrl-z) and let key repeat until the block
             | appears as you want. Select it, copy. Press and hold redo.
             | Select area. Paste.
             | 
             | That works in practically every editor. The entire point of
             | region undo is that it's faster and more convenient than
             | doing it manually.
        
           | baby wrote:
           | I'm not sure why not? Everything has a shortcut in vscode.
           | And if it doesn't you can use the command palette.
        
             | dotancohen wrote:
             | You might like VIM. In VIM everything has a shortcut as
             | well.
             | 
             | In fact, in VIM, everything _is_ a shortcut.
        
               | baby wrote:
               | How do you find commands if you don't know the shortcuts
               | though? Or if you installed a new plugin? That's my big
               | problem with emacs and why I don't use it anymore.
        
               | bitbckt wrote:
               | Apropos: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_n
               | ode/emacs/Ap...
        
         | lvass wrote:
         | There are many terminal web browsers.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | teddyh wrote:
       | I think many Vim users look at Emacs and go "Hmm, Emacs is a bit
       | more clunky when I use Emacs to do the exact same things I do in
       | Vim. Therefore, I'll stick to Vim."
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | lqet wrote:
         | As a vim user, I mostly look at this article and think, "Hmm,
         | Emacs seems to include an _artists mode_ for drawing ASCII
         | images. I need a text editor. Therefore, I 'll stick to vim."
        
           | drivers99 wrote:
           | As a vi user, I got to artist mode and was wondering what
           | keys you would press to draw rectangles and circles and how
           | you would get out of it, but it doesn't say.
        
           | dotancohen wrote:
           | That's how I felt until I started using org-mode.
           | 
           | I think that Org-mode is now the fourth piece of software on
           | my never-gonna-give-you-up list, after VIM, GNU coreutils,
           | and Anki. I seem to add one per decade.
        
           | User23 wrote:
           | Then you definitely wouldn't be interested in M-x tetris.
        
             | marcosdumay wrote:
             | Maybe M-x doctor could help, but maybe not...
        
               | Shared404 wrote:
               | How does that make you feel?
        
         | ByteJockey wrote:
         | I mean. Emacs has the ability to do basically what vim does.
         | Evil mode is really nice (though I can never get used the =
         | register evaluating elisp instead of vimscript).
         | 
         | What kills me about emacs is the startup time. Breaks my flow
         | when I'm jumping around and need to edit something quickly.
         | 
         | Though I'll admit that doom provides a very nice environment
         | for when I want to play around with some lisp.
        
           | cyberbanjo wrote:
           | Use emacsclient and don't close emacs server. Super fast
           | startup (for emacs). There is a guide on emacswiki afaicr
        
           | rthomas6 wrote:
           | Check out Doom Emacs for a fast startup time with no server.
        
             | ByteJockey wrote:
             | I mention using doom in the last line of the comment you
             | responded to.
             | 
             | But, yeah. I use it for the start up time/vim compatibility
             | out of the box.
        
           | tarboreus wrote:
           | Run Emacs as a server. Then open with emacsclient. Instant
           | and you have access to the same process you've been using
           | with all the buffers, etc.
           | 
           | emacs --daemon
           | 
           | emacsclient <fie>
        
             | Jtsummers wrote:
             | emacs --daemon=<name>       emacsclient -s <name>
             | 
             | Useful for when you have different contexts and want to
             | separate them more cleanly.
        
         | notreallyserio wrote:
         | "It'd take me longer to figure out how to use emacs than it
         | would to just do what I want in vim, and I'm really just trying
         | to get to retirement before I lose my mind."
        
         | tra3 wrote:
         | Check out evil mode. Makes emacs behave more like vi. Game
         | changer for me.
        
           | RMPR wrote:
           | One of my pain points with evil mode (and with every vim
           | emulation for that matter): it's often incomplete. To keep my
           | fingers on the home row I use Alt to exit insert mode (:help
           | i_META in neovim) but Alt- is already mapped to something in
           | Emacs, and that's just painful.
        
         | alpaca128 wrote:
         | And there's nothing wrong with that opinion. As long as the
         | basics aren't covered I don't care about extra features.
         | 
         | For me Emacs fulfills the same purpose as Vim, but mostly in
         | exactly the opposite way of how I want it. Some people prefer
         | that, I don't. It's a great program, but not my cup of tea and
         | so I don't use it. Vim does everything I need without annoying
         | or distracting me, which is rare enough.
        
       | mlaretallack wrote:
       | I really respect people who can use emacs (and vim, vi etc...)
       | they wiz around doing allsorts and make it look effortless.
       | 
       | The only reason I have not tried is I seem to spend most of my
       | time thinking about the change, and the time saved is easily
       | wiped out by the time taked to re-write the line 5 times.
        
         | reddit_clone wrote:
         | You don't really have to. Try DoomEmacs or something similar,
         | very little tinkering needed to get going.
        
       | animal_spirits wrote:
       | Sometimes I wish I initially spent my time learning emacs. Vim
       | has been great to me. I don't value programming workflows as much
       | as I used to so I'm not going through that steep learning curve
       | again
        
         | zingar wrote:
         | I think you get a lot just out of knowing modal editing.
         | Sometimes I don't even realise what is emacs and what is vim
         | because of evil keybindings.
        
         | dotancohen wrote:
         | > Sometimes I wish I initially spent my time learning emacs.
         | Vim has been great to me.
         | 
         | Try SpaceMacs, or even just Evil. I've found that Emacs (the
         | text editor environment) and VIM (the language for interfacing
         | with a text editor environment) skillsets are actually
         | complimentary and together form a terrific text editor.
        
           | srcreigh wrote:
           | If spacemacs or evil seem too inauthentic or complicated, I
           | suggest boon-mode. It's a very simple, modular, minimal modal
           | editing package with verbs and motions.
           | 
           | https://github.com/jyp/boon
        
           | jb1991 wrote:
           | And if you like modal editing but want to stick to a more
           | emacs-centric interaction, there is God mode which I
           | eventually found to be better than evil if you are working
           | solely within emacs.
        
         | hvgk wrote:
         | Conversely I feel I wasted my time learning emacs and moved to
         | vim eventually. I also only religiously use a subset of vim
         | functionality which is fulfilled by most of the vi equivalent
         | editors. This turned into a massive advantage for me as I spent
         | most of my career dotting around random Unix and Linux machines
         | doing admin work. Vi derivative is always there and the muscle
         | memory was ready to go.
         | 
         | One of the key things I found though is that I learned to
         | compose tools outside of vi rather than rely on the editor
         | functionality. This was applicable to much larger problem
         | domains than just editing. The Unix philosophy of using lots of
         | small well defined things to solve problems applies to editing
         | text.
        
           | cyberbanjo wrote:
           | FWIW if I can ssh I can use emacs tramp to edit remotely, if
           | there's latency lag, it seems similar to using local editor.
        
             | kovek wrote:
             | I really like to use code-server instead
        
         | rthomas6 wrote:
         | You may like Doom Emacs. It has really really good Vim
         | keybindings. Some people like Spacemacs too, but I found it too
         | bloated and too abstracted (hard to fix when it breaks).
         | 
         | I still find myself reaching for Vim when I want to just write
         | a simple script. Emacs, VS Code, etc. can just be too much
         | sometimes.
        
           | dfinninger wrote:
           | Have you looked into emacsclient? If you have emacs running
           | you can connect to it in the terminal so that there's
           | (practically) no startup time.
           | 
           | It replaced vim on the cli for me.
        
           | Y_Y wrote:
           | > I still find myself reaching for Vim when I want to just
           | write a simple script. Emacs, VS Code, etc. can just be too
           | much sometimes.
           | 
           | I used to do this too. What stopped me was that I often use
           | emacs as a terminal multiplexer with vterm, and it becomes
           | super difficult to control vim if you have evil-mode
           | capturing those same inputs. In the end oh-my-zsh (more
           | crappy bloat like spacemacs which I love to bits) has an
           | alias called "e" which will open a file for editing in your
           | current emacs.
           | 
           | (If only it worked through docker! Or maybe it does and I
           | just don't understand TRAMP well enough yet.)
        
           | zingar wrote:
           | I had a pretty full featured vim setup (creaking under the
           | weight of all those plugins) and then switched to spacemacs.
           | You're exactly right that debugging was a pain sometimes, but
           | once I started to figure out what everything was, I wanted to
           | replicate everything I had in vim.
           | 
           | I realised that if I'd started minimal I would have
           | reinvented so many of the spacemacs wheels, but done it
           | worse.
           | 
           | Spacemacs could do with being slightly more user friendly. It
           | gives you a lot of friendliness already, but to prevent
           | people from being frightened off by emacs' formidable
           | reputation it really needs to "work" out of the box. For me
           | that would be one click install and a reasonable suite of
           | IDE-like features for working with a given language pre-
           | configured. That would include scripting to install the
           | command line tools that they shell out to, e.g. ag or rg.
        
         | hwestiii wrote:
         | As far as I know, pure vanilla emacs from GNU comes with
         | multiple vi emulations. I've been using viper for 20 years.
         | It's the only reason I use emacs at all. I had a co-worker many
         | years ago who swore by emacs, but I found the key bindings
         | completely counterintuitive having learned vi while getting my
         | degree. Having made that discovery I was off to the races with
         | emacs, and have never looked back.
        
       | jb1991 wrote:
       | Amazing that I have not used emacs in _years_ but I wanted to see
       | this artist mode with my own eyes, so I opened it and was
       | surprised I could still remember how to get all around with the
       | m-x commands... my muscle memory even remembered the combo to
       | exit emacs correctly, and even as I type this, I couldn 't tell
       | you what that key combo is! It's all in my finger muscles'
       | memory. Incredible.
        
         | pantulis wrote:
         | This is what Emacs does to your brain. Dont know if that's a
         | good or a bad thing, mind you.
         | 
         | My first serious Emacs engagement happened in 1996, with
         | XEmacs. Then it became my editor of choice for basically two
         | decades. I can confidently say that I can open _your_ Emacs
         | setup and manage my way around it (unless you happen to be an
         | evil-mode infidel, that is).
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | umanwizard wrote:
         | C-x C-c
        
       | entropie wrote:
       | I use emacs for over a decade now. It took like 2 years and 3
       | serious approaches to get into it. Now it feels like home.
       | 
       | I didn't know about SelectiveUndo. Nice.
        
       | adriancr wrote:
       | This is what I like about emacs see a few nifty things, easily
       | add shortcuts and integrate, (selective-mode is useful for an
       | outline of a file).
       | 
       | Power comes from being able to customize - add a easy shortcut to
       | show outline, add another to back to non-outlined. Then use these
       | to jump around code.
        
       | justinhj wrote:
       | Great to see lists like these. I'm a long time Emacs user and
       | recently learned to use neovim. I made the same mistake many new
       | Emacs users make in that I installed a lot of plugins at once and
       | lost control of the editor. Only by installing packages
       | incrementally after you have discovered a real need, can you keep
       | mentally on top of what your editor is capable of.
        
         | bloopernova wrote:
         | This is a very good point. I first tried to jump in Emacs by
         | using Spacemacs, and was overwhelmed trying to manage the
         | fairly huge and complex init.el that Spacemacs produces. I also
         | had lots of trouble before realizing that Spacemacs and vanilla
         | Emacs package configurations should really be treated as
         | separate and not mixed together.
         | 
         | I'm sure if I went back to Spacemacs now, I'd understand things
         | a whole lot better, but as a new user, it was far too much to
         | figure out at once.
         | 
         | So I went Vanilla, and haven't looked back. I do think that
         | there should be some more articles out there like "so you've
         | decided to try Emacs? Here's what to do beyond opening and
         | saving documents". With a heavy emphasis on, as you said,
         | incrementally adding to your configuration. Something like
         | "here's why you split your config file into 2, with automatic
         | changes going into one file, and manual going into another"
         | followed by "here's use-package" and "if you want to X, here
         | are Y packages that do it" with comparisons between each
         | different way. But broken down into small chunks so things can
         | be done incrementally.
        
       | b3morales wrote:
       | That inward-spiralling learning curve never ends. `selective-
       | display' is my new trick for the day. Thanks!
        
       | rStar wrote:
       | emacs is like a musical instrument in program form. one is only
       | limited by their creativity.
        
       | Kessler83 wrote:
       | Great article! I like the approach to focus on things that ship
       | per default and take no time to learn! Also didn't know about
       | undo in region!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-11-25 23:00 UTC)