Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Emacs and Vim Combined In New 'Spacemacs' Distro (spacemacs.org)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the bastard-offspring dept.

Long-time Slashdot reader Qbertino brings news of a new text editor offering what he calls "a modern, hipster-compliant makeover" of both Emacs and Vim: As a classic, perhaps the classic GNU project, Emacs has been marred by abysmal branding and marketing...that has improved slightly but might still leave some people unsatisfied [and] has also been engulfed in an eternal war with Vim, the editor of the beast. Mope no further, salvation is nigh! Spacemacs is a new Emacs distribution that aims to combine all the goodies of Emacs and Vim and then some...
Version .2 of Spacemacs was released this week "with more than 1700 commits since the last major version released in January 2016." With nearly 500 contributors on GItHub, Spacemacs plans to be "crowd-configured" with "curated packages tuned by power users," and is offering features like a real-time display of available key bindings, a simple query system for layers and packages, and of course, a clearly defined set of conventions.

130 comments

  1. Oh great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Here comes that 1010101010101 guy to whine about "space nutters."

    1. Re:Oh great by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      What are these people thinking? You can't use emacs on Mars! Plus it is no place to raise your kids.

    2. Re:Oh great by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      Actually, at ~0.4 g, raising anything gets significantly easier.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:Oh great by alex67500 · · Score: 1

      For me it's the "aims to combine all the goodies of Emacs and Vim" that gets me...

      Sounds like an old oblig. xkcd: https://xkcd.com/927/

  2. Oh come on... by willoughby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a joke, right? :wq
    dammit

    1. Re:Oh come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gah, why did you save it? :q! dammit!

      (I jest. Both vim and emacs are equally annoying, just for different reasons).

    2. Re:Oh come on... by eric31415927 · · Score: 1

      I prefer JOWE - Johnny's Own Version of Vim and Emacs
      (of course the double V makes a W in the acronym)

    3. Re:Oh come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the UK, you can't seriously call a text editor 'spacca macs'

    4. Re:Oh come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Doppel vee. DOPPEL VEE!

    5. Re:Oh come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a joke. I downloaded it but it was just an archive with a bunch of random junk files and there was no program in it.

    6. Re: Oh come on... by johnsnails · · Score: 1

      Shift+z+z

    7. Re:Oh come on... by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      I sometimes have to write boring reports with Word.
      I always look for ":wq" before sending it. I found 2 occurences last week :D

    8. Re: Oh come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They insist on calling it a distro. It's just a config.

      Someone on their team needs to pull their head out of their ass, and stop trying to hype up their "marketing" with idiotic terms that don't add up.

    9. Re: Oh come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm appalled that you don't use ":x"

      I mean, how inefficient can you stand to be? It's disgusting!

    10. Re: Oh come on... by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      Thanks. One can really learn a new trick every day with vim.

    11. Re: Oh come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think "millennial hipsters" reference is enough info to evaluate the technical merits.

  3. What bout butterfiles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just wondering

    Sent from my butterfly 7.

  4. What's next? Human sacrifice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Dogs and cats living together?

  5. Hipster compliant? by tsqr · · Score: 1

    Jesus wept.

    1. Re: Hipster compliant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      More like he kicked over their table, cast their project out of the cathedral, and banished them to the bazaar. Jesus was like the original hippie, man, but with a nasty temper he inherited from his dad.

    2. Re: Hipster compliant? by Theovon · · Score: 0

      Actually, the funny thing is that all these Christians say they want to be more Christ-like, but they’re nothing like Jesus. Yeshu (his real name as well as I can render it in latin script) was a counter-culturalist, hippy, ass-kicker. He mercilessly picked on the Pharisees and other Jewish leaders for being overly legalistic, and both he and the writings of others in the new testament were filled with subtle to blatant fuck-you the conformism of the Romans. It’s amazing how much like the Pharisees so many modern Christians are, espectially the so-called Biblical literalists (who nevertheless seem to cherry-pick as much as the interpretive believers they claim to be superior to).

      If Christians were more like Jesus, if they went around challenging the status quo and overly-rigid thinking and pushing people to think critically, then I would really like that religion.

    3. Re: Hipster compliant? by VanGarrett · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Jesus' real name, if you wanted to translate it by the same rules as has been done with other people who had that name in the Bible, is Joshua.

      The trouble is that Jesus' message is largely misunderstood. People get tied up in obedience and the Hell-and-Damnation, self-righteous preaching style of modern evangelists. They tend to think that this is what Christianity is about, and you're most certainly right-- if Christ were to walk among us today in the way that he walked among the Romans, he'd be flipping tables at a great deal of American churches, just as he did with the Pharisees. Occasionally though, you do encounter a congregation that gets it right-- where they understand that Jesus' message had to do with love. That God loves us, and that we should show our love for Him, by loving eachother. Even Christ's sacrifice is misunderstood; people compare it to the Jews sacrificing doves and lambs to God, but really it's more like Abraham sacrificing his son to God; except that in Jesus' case, the roles are reversed. We didn't sacrifice God's son to God, but God sacrificed His son to us. That's what people don't get. The whole point of the thing is that we are more important to Him than anything else, including His own flesh.

      Does that sound more like something you might be able to get into?

      --
      Learning about brewing beer, by brewing beer.
    4. Re: Hipster compliant? by argumentsockpuppet · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I'll bite.

      Peter had a tendency to use bad language. He let his temper flare when it did no good. When confronted with a test of his faith, he buckled. I can see myself in his failures. Thomas saw people fed when it was impossible, saw people healed and knew Jesus. Yet when told that Jesus was alive, refused to accept the possibility of another miracle. He went so far as to say he would never believe unless he could touch the pierced flesh of Jesus himself. If there's anyone I see myself in, it's not Jesus, it's Thomas.

      Of course Christians want to be like Jesus, but we don't act like him. We act like the people he loved and forgave. Over and over, we act like them and we have faith he forgives us too. The story the Bible tells is about people who fail as often as not.

      I call myself a Christian, not because I act like Christ, but because I believe I should act like Christ. And because I believe Jesus forgives me for failing.

      I've believed a lot of things that I no longer believe. As many times as I've gotten things wrong, I'm sure I still have a lot of things wrong now. I have done things, and I continue to do things, I regret. I think Yeshu will have to forgive me for getting his name wrong too, but considering my track record, I think that's the least of my transgressions.

      If Christians were more like Jesus, if they went around challenging the status quo and overly-rigid thinking and pushing people to think critically, then I would really like that religion.

      Me too. Meanwhile, I (try to) stick with something I was taught a long time ago. I do the best I can, where I am, with what I have.

    5. Re: Hipster compliant? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Jesus' real name, if you wanted to translate it by the same rules as has been done with other people who had that name in the Bible, is Joshua.

      That is one hundred percent false. The GP has it right. You're just an ignorant idiot who can't see the difference between Yeshu and Yehoshua.

    6. Re: Hipster compliant? by cprasky · · Score: 2

      In fact, I have a real problem with the whole "sacrificing your children" motif of the Bible, whether it is Abraham sacrificing his son, Lot offering his pubescent daughters to a horny mob or God sacrificing his son. It all seems to be pointing humanity to a self-destructive, counter-survival path. Sort of a throwback to the worship of Moloch.

      --
      The optimist proclaims we live in the best of all possible worlds and the pessimist fears this may be true.
    7. Re: Hipster compliant? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Many Christians are.
      There is just a loud subset who are just regressive.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re: Hipster compliant? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      I had always assumed that "Jesus" was a Latinized version of "Jesse" ("Yishai" in Hebrew). That certainly would have added to the idea that he was a descendant of David (Jesse was David's father).

    9. Re: Hipster compliant? by tepples · · Score: 1

      You're just an ignorant idiot

      That tone is not appreciated, especially when the names are presumably variant spellings of the same name. I'd prefer that you back up your assertion with etymology rather than with name-calling, and I imagine others reading this would agree.

    10. Re: Hipster compliant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some of us, of course, don't care what "Jesus" is called as what some mentally ill (or possibly just over-medicated on primitive hallucinogens) delusional group of people believed that this guy was doesn't even make good science fiction, let alone fact.

      The son of a mythical beast must be, themselves, mythical.

    11. Re: Hipster compliant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, he sacrifices his Son, then brings him back from the dead a few days later. What kind of lame sacrifice is that?

  6. Emacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    culate is why don't want to.

  7. Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You managed to rile both vim and emacs users!

    Just going through the documentation makes my blood boil. "Who needs vimscript anyway?"

    Fuck you!

    1. Re:Amazing! by arth1 · · Score: 1

      You managed to rile both vim and emacs users!

      Thank goodness I'm a vi user, then. One of the first things I do on systems is getting a real vi instead of vim.

    2. Re: Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank goodness I'm a vi user, then. One of the first things I do on systems is getting a real vi instead of vim.PO

      You do getting?

      You do speaking good as well.

      No wonder you can't handle vim.

    3. Re:Amazing! by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Just going through the documentation makes my blood boil. "Who needs vimscript anyway?"

      To be fair, Emacs LISP *is* an actual full-blown LISP system, not a (simple) scripting or macro language.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    4. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, Emacs LISP *is* an actual full-blown LISP system, not a (simple) scripting or macro language.

      In all fairness, it needs more cowbell.

    5. Re:Amazing! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      vim's compatibility mode with vi is pretty good. Honestly it sounds a bit pretentious.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    6. Re:Amazing! by arth1 · · Score: 1

      vim's compatibility mode with vi is pretty good. Honestly it sounds a bit pretentious.

      One problem is that it has all the bells and whistles by default, and you need to turn them off, through a bunch of vimrc statements that are way too non-intuitive for a human to remember them.
      Another big one is lack of default file locking. I want to be sure that someone else (which might include me in a different window) won't be editing the same file.
      And I have "uu" in motor memory - it undoes the last change then undoes the undo, so you get a visual diff of the last change. With vim, it causes two undoes, and you have to hit CTR-R twice.
      But the biggest problems is the dependency chain - it polls in everything except the kitchen sink, and installing it on an embedded system is difficult at best.

      vim was great back when we needed an editor on the Amiga.

    7. Re:Amazing! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      One problem is that it has all the bells and whistles by default, and you need to turn them off, through a bunch of vimrc statements that are way too non-intuitive for a human to remember them. :set compatible

      But the biggest problems is the dependency chain - it polls in everything except the kitchen sink, and installing it on an embedded system is difficult at best.

      Sure that's a reason to not install it, but not really a reason to remove it from a system you administer.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    8. Re:Amazing! by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Sure that's a reason to not install it, but not really a reason to remove it from a system you administer.

      I don't, but I make sure that vi points to a non-vim variety. People can still type "vim", or set their own alias.

      (And any jr admin that edits shared/system files and chooses to use a non-locking editor like vim or nano or whatever better work on copies, lest they be smacked with a rubber chicken.)

  8. Bettername by Velox_SwiftFox · · Score: 1

    Parrot

  9. Common distro editor or fail into oblivion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'd love an alternative to vi that would be bundled with every unix/linux variant so I'd not have to teach every new hire the intricacies of "vi" and the limitations of it. Truth be told I always tell them they can pick their editor that supports their operating system... but vi works without adding a package to a *nix* distribution.

    Peace out.

    1. Re:Common distro editor or fail into oblivion by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      nano is in the common Linux distributions that I've used. It's good for basic text editing, and the keyboard commands aren't as arcane as vi or emacs (and the most common ones are shown at the bottom of the screen).

    2. Re:Common distro editor or fail into oblivion by tepples · · Score: 1

      Yes, both RPM and deb distributions of Linux that I've used come with GNU nano.

      And if you're on a *BSD, it probably comes with Pico, the Alpine Composer. It feels like nano because nano was a functional clone of Pico back before Pico was free software.

    3. Re:Common distro editor or fail into oblivion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the only real limitations to vi (and vim) are the user... vi is actually quite versatile and easy to use, it's just the users that have been convinced it's hard to use when it really isn't. Of course we have whole generations that have used nothing but gui based editors that are practically word processors so, naturally, a powerful programmer's text editor would seem foreign to them (and apparently you too). But then I may be a bit biased... I started with ed as my first "powerful" text editor, so vi is comparatively easy for me. Before that I programmed using switches on the front panel and that would probably qualify in most circles as actually hard to use, it certainly wasn't nearly as convenient as vi or vim.

  10. distro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not a distro.

  11. done years ago by rubycodez · · Score: 2

    there's been vi package for emacs, and emacs emulation for vim....whoop de doo.

    1. Re:done years ago by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I would much rather see a maintained port of notepad++ to Linux.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:done years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Locutus: Why do you resist us? We only wish to raise quality of editors for all species.
      Worf: I like my vim the way it is.

    3. Re:done years ago by Meneth · · Score: 1

      I make do with SciTE.

  12. Emacs and Vim combined? Blasphemy!!! by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

    Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.

  13. Re:What's next? Human sacrifice? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Dogs and cats living together?

    Trumpillary: It gropes itself then buys itself furniture via email.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  14. I like vim cuz my fingers know it by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    I don't need to think about what to do, my brain produces input and my fingers make it happen. Later on I can let my brain proofread, but my fingers still do what I want without me thinking about how to do it.

    I never got to that point with emacs.

  15. Devout VI and EMACS users now have a common cause by PerlPunk · · Score: 1

    Something like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  16. What is the point? by wasted · · Score: 1

    a modern, hipster-compliant makeover

    Please, let's not even hint that "hipster-compliant" is a valid or desirable standard.

    1. Re: What is the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if it's an emacs mode.
      M-x hipster-mode

  17. Me too :wq by raymorris · · Score: 1

    My fingers do vim automatically too, sometimes when I don't even want them to. :wq

    1. Re:Me too :wq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better to be :wq than the bane of my existence ... :q!

      FML!!

    2. Re:Me too :wq by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      My fingers do vim automatically too, sometimes when I don't even want them to. :wq

      Yes, and your girl friend says: knock it off.

      Also note that Emacs key bindings can help with your dexterity :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    3. Re:Me too :wq by kybred · · Score: 1

      Yes, sometimes I'll find :wq in a Word document that I've been editing. Or hit when I'm typing an email in Outlook.

    4. Re:Me too :wq by kybred · · Score: 1

      Yes, sometimes I'll find :wq in a Word document that I've been editing. Or hit when I'm typing an email in Outlook.

      That should say '... hit ESC when I'm typing ...'

    5. Re:Me too :wq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My fingers do vim automatically too, sometimes when I don't even want them to. :wq

      Yes, and your girl friend says: knock it off.

      Also note that Emacs key bindings can help with your dexterity :-)

      Sex wasn't the same any more when I swapped Alt and Control keys.

    6. Re:Me too :wq by hawk · · Score: 1

      They can also send you off to medical care . . .

      After a few long days editing on a full sized CKIE (control key in exile) keyboard, I found myself at the campus quack. Muscle strain in my pinkie, it turned out, from rotating much of my (large) hand and reaching that control key in the far corner . . .

      By some strange coincidence, the janitors must have drooped my keyboard that day, as a little piece magically appeared next to it that sure looked like a physical toggle for the capslock key (surely *I* would never tamper with university equipment), and I was finally able to remap it to put the control key back where God Meant it to be . . .

      hawk

  18. Who posted this? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Were the Clinton versus Trump comment threads too tame?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  19. We have to do something now that XEmacs is dead by kriston · · Score: 2

    We have to do something now that XEmacs is basically dead and gone.

    Like improving text mode operations on screens wider than 100 characters, for one.

    --

    Kriston

    1. Re:We have to do something now that XEmacs is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bloody UI hipsters refusing to start up a graphical environment.

      Are you still running a 286 or something?

    2. Re:We have to do something now that XEmacs is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Counterpoint: Why bring in a bunch of X dependencies just so you can run a graphical editor on a remote server? Learn to use a non-graphical editor, as most servers either don't have the required X dependencies installed or disable remote X for security reasons.

    3. Re:We have to do something now that XEmacs is dead by tepples · · Score: 1

      Remote SSH without X is still more far efficient with the typical home or small-business Internet connection than remote X, especially when administering a virtual server with limited RAM and disk space.

  20. Oblig: Ed man! by dogvomit · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ed, man! !man ed.

    “Ed is the standard text editor.”

    --
    Happy happy oh my friend

  21. Re:What's next? Human sacrifice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nah, Hillary leaves Bill and marries Trump.

  22. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, vim and emacs living together... mass hysteria!

  23. I still don't let emacs users into my home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are a filthy race, and will steal as soon as your back is turned.

  24. HOWTO pronounce "spacemacs" by Provocateur · · Score: 1

    Why don't you just ditch vim or ditch emacs and watch the video that will tell you what you don't know! Let actress Tina Fey and Tracy Morgan and the whole 30Rock crew show you how to pronounce Dr Leo Spaceman's name.

    90% after watching the video, will BEGIN TO GUESS how spacemacs is pronounced. The other 5% will guess correctly. 5% will just fire up their ridiculous GUI editor like Gedit or Kwrite to try and steer clear of a religious war, but you know what is happening in the Middle East is not over, because no one has any f***ing clue what :wq does, they think finding WMDs matters the most. So gtuess who's not there, it's BIG DUBYA.

    Watch the video, then draw your own pronunciation. Then ditch emacs, because you just lost 22 seconds watching that stupid clip, and that's the time it took me to fire up my GUI editor, Slashdot, as long as there are no Unicode characters in this rant.

    Video is actually https://www.youtube.com/watch?... jlBQqJh46_M

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  25. does run systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does run systemd?

    1. Re: does run systemd? by lokedhs · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, yes. Systemd integration was merged a few months ago. Sadly, I'm not even joking.

  26. Wow by jwymanm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All these posts and not a single positive? I've been using Spacemacs for several months now and its the best thing since sliced bread. It's got amazing defaults and great layering support. Everything is handled inside one .spacemacs file inside your home directory so you can just copy that around and get the same exact experience. I use holy mode which is just emacs bindings in the forefront. It's a great project and it continues to get better.. nothing negative and not at all useless like some very nice spammers here posted.

    1. Re:Wow by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      All these posts and not a single positive? I've been using Spacemacs for several months now and its the best thing since sliced bread. It's got amazing defaults and great layering support. Everything is handled inside one .spacemacs file inside your home directory so you can just copy that around and get the same exact experience. I use holy mode which is just emacs bindings in the forefront. It's a great project and it continues to get better.. nothing negative and not at all useless like some very nice spammers here posted.

      Congratulation. You discovered you like Emacs (or XEmacs).

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:Wow by jwymanm · · Score: 1

      Hmm, last stable release for Xemacs was 7 years ago. Maybe you need to rediscover emacs?

    3. Re:Wow by drjones78 · · Score: 2

      It really is a great piece of work.

  27. will it ship with Jesux? by plopez · · Score: 0

    http://pudge.net/jesux/

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  28. Level up Vimmers. :-) by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    From the Spacemacs documentation page:

    4 Who can benefit from this?

    Spacemacs was initially intended to be used by Vim users who want to go to the next level by using Emacs (see guide for Vimmers).

    Also, Emacs can *already* emulate Vi and Vim so... what's the point again?

    Remember: Programmers don't let other programmers co-opt editors while drunk...
    [ The More You Know ]

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Level up Vimmers. :-) by MadMaverick9 · · Score: 2

      so... what's the point again?

      But but ... Evil ain't hip.

      ugh ... what's up these days with the mentality that everything that has been around for a few years is ol' fashioned and needs to be replaced and re-innovated?

      I am sick and tired of that mentality.

    2. Re:Level up Vimmers. :-) by drjones78 · · Score: 2

      If you read more of the documentation, you could have answered your own question. Spacemacs is a akin to Emacs Prelude, Emacs Live, or Emacs Starter Kit... its a *very well* polished, well tuned, and even user-friendly, evil-mode/helm-mode based emacs setup, along with a lot of other goodies baked - including lots of great work making other packages in the emacs ecosystem work more smoothly with evil. If you use either emacs or vim, its worth your while to check it out.

    3. Re:Level up Vimmers. :-) by drjones78 · · Score: 2

      I'm sick and tired of the mentality that criticizes stuff while being completely ignorant (and wrong) about what it is.

    4. Re:Level up Vimmers. :-) by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      I've used Emacs for 25+ years, pretty sure I'm fine with it as-is. But thanks anyway.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    5. Re:Level up Vimmers. :-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You make it sound as if Emacs were ever-changing. But after the great C-h he was sorry about drowning the humans in help screens and as sign of his forgiveness he gave Emacs a GUI in all colors of the rainbow and listened to the clamor of the X input events so that never again Backspace and Delete would be the same again.

      But alas, the users would not know what was good for them and listened to the snake and its hiss of ssh and forgot about the GUI and worshipped the tty.

    6. Re:Level up Vimmers. :-) by drjones78 · · Score: 1

      Well since you are fine with it as-is, therefore it is is fine for everyone as-is. Or perhaps, if you use emacs as-is for 25+ years, you have 25+ years of ingrained bad habits.

    7. Re:Level up Vimmers. :-) by hercludes · · Score: 1

      Huh? Spacemacs uses Evil. It's not re-innovating or replacing anything. As far as I'm concerned it installs a whole bunch of default configurations, packages, etc. while making configuration very simple. The alternative of creating your own Emacs configuration could take several weeks before you get to the point of productivity as most of people's previous VIM configs. For spacemacs the process is much faster.

  29. Distro??? by MadMaverick9 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's just a fucking ordinary Emacs add-on.

    Typical hipster marketing talk.

    1. Re:Distro??? by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      It's just a fucking ordinary Emacs add-on.

      Typical hipster marketing talk.

      Emacs was hipster before we ever started using that word. And it's pronounced Vee-Eye, not Vie. Off lawn get.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    2. Re:Distro??? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2

      Darn. And I was ready to make a joke that emacs users are finally admitting that it's really a full operating system that doesn't include a decent text editor.

    3. Re:Distro??? by hercludes · · Score: 1

      I think distro is an accurate label. You simply can't "add" spacemacs onto emacs, it completely remodels how emacs, configuration and package-managing works. In fact, when you install spacemacs, it wipes out everything in the .emacs.d directory and installs its own packages, default configurations, etc. If that isn't a distro I don't know what is.

    4. Re: Distro??? by untoreh+ · · Score: 1

      A collection of software aka plugins is indeed called a distribution...

  30. Has no one seen Underworld! Kill the Abomination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like a Vampire/Lycan hybrid, this must not be allowed to exist. It will be the ruination of us all!

  31. Yes but by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    Does it support Parrot?

    --
    http://saveie6.com/
    1. Re:Yes but by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Does it support Parrot?

      M-x jimmy-buffett-mode

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  32. what is vi bringing to the party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you add vi to emacs, the result is emacs.

  33. Emacs vs VI by hackus · · Score: 2

    The entire concept of a having to push extra keys to simply edit text is flawed.

    Modeless design won a long time ago in software...not including of course the whole Windows/Drop Down Menus thing, also modeless design.

    --
    Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    1. Re:Emacs vs VI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Having two modes, insert mode & navigation mode, is actually my favorite thing about vi. It's why I gave up on emacs and went back to vim. Navigation mode is SOOO much more convenient to have all the keys available for commands instead of constantly being in insert mode and having to hold down a control key to start command sequences. Turns out, most of the time when I'm in a text file, I want to examine it, not text-edit it. So constant insert mode (for me) is not an advantage. And, I don't like using a mouse when I navigate a file or a hierarchy of files. I find it much easier to stick with vi navigation!

    2. Re:Emacs vs VI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The entire concept of a having to push extra keys to simply edit text is flawed.

      Richard Stallman has RSI. Ben Wing has RSI. RSI is sort of the standard story of many (X)Emacs project leaders and power users. And it's not the mouse that is to blame but rather key chording, particularly with the control key, as a result of having to push extra keys simultanously with normal keys, thanks to the modeless design of Emacs.

      Yes, modeless design won a long time ago in software, but that's because heavy coding is not the normal use case for computers.

    3. Re:Emacs vs VI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The entire concept of a having to push extra keys to simply edit text is flawed.

      Richard Stallman has RSI. Ben Wing has RSI. RSI is sort of the standard story of many (X)Emacs project leaders and power users. And it's not the mouse that is to blame but rather key chording, particularly with the control key, as a result of having to push extra keys simultanously with normal keys, thanks to the modeless design of Emacs.

      Yes, modeless design won a long time ago in software, but that's because heavy coding is not the normal use case for computers.

      I don't think "Toe Cheese" Stallman's RSI is due to just key chording. He needs to learn about using soap, razors then fix his personality, that would probably go a long way to treating his RSI.

    4. Re:Emacs vs VI by 91degrees · · Score: 2

      .not including of course the whole Windows/Drop Down Menus thing, also modeless design.

      . Agree with your first point, but it is nice to have a text mode editor. Sometimes you want to ssh into a system.

      That said, I do prefer pretty much everything to vi. It takes too long to learn to even simply type in it. I guess it's good for people who do everything over the network but on the whole I prefer even the MSDOS edit application.

    5. Re:Emacs vs VI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too long to learn? Hit 'i' to go to insert mode, then type. it's that easy.

    6. Re:Emacs vs VI by tepples · · Score: 1

      If you like MS-DOS Editor, you may also like GNU nano or Pico, which is a text editor for UNIX systems at a similar level of abstraction.

    7. Re:Emacs vs VI by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Pico and nano are fine. The help bar at the bottom is a useful feature for those

      My point wasn't that these are particularly brilliant. More that they're simple to pick up. It would be nice to have a little more functionality but for just modifying a few lines in a config file (which is all many of us want to do via ssh) they're more than adequate!

    8. Re:Emacs vs VI by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      And how am I meant to know to press 'i' in the first place? I should not need to research how to use a text editor. Pico I just started typing. MSDOS edit, I just started typing. Same with gedit, scite, emacs. The help command isn't much better (if it works. Typing :help in cygwin tells me help.txt is missing). Apparently I want "insert mode". First few times I encountered vi, I poked around for a few minutes, gave up and went back to pico.

      Now I've typed, I want to save. How do I do that? I want to move the cursor. How do I do that? Arrow keys seem to produce A, B, C and D. How do I cut and paste? None of this is obvious.

  34. Enter the vimacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's new, it's improved, it's upgraded to 80 gigabytes and constantly swapping.

  35. I'll stick with vile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vile_(editor)

  36. Emacs and Vim live together in perfect harmony by howlingmad · · Score: 1

    Emacs and Vim live together in perfect harmony
    Side by side on my keyboard, oh Lord, why don't we?

  37. ho ho hoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    most of the design time was spent figuring out hard enough keycombo for exitting the editor to satisfy both vim and emacs users

  38. Vi, vim, and vigor. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

    My fingers do vim automatically too, sometimes when I don't even want them to. :wq

    Yeah.[esc]

    When I bought my firsrt unix machine, back in the '70s, it had memory expansion - two whole megabytes of RAM total - but no demand-paged virtual memory. I had to use vi because emacs was too big for it to compile, let alone run

    (Joke at the time was the name was an acronym for Eight Megabytes and Constantly Swapping. My now-wife was in college about then, and her prof read mail in emacs - on his highly-privileged account which would let emacs have as much of the swap disk as it wanted. That would bring the time-shared machine to its knees and keep his class from getting their homework done.)

    For a couple years I was one of the sysops and a heavy poster on the first site to use picospan - the conferencing software that The Well eventually migrated to. That drove the vi command set into my brain's automation, until it was more familiar than just typing.

    Several times I tried to use emacs, thinking that if I became even moderately proficient in the editing funtions, having the kitchen-sink feature set available would be a net gain. But every time I tried I'd find it would take three times as many keystrokes to do some useful stuff I did a LOT.

    I even thought to try a vi emulation mode as a way to ease in. Oops: It had TWO of them - with different shortfalls. WIth one I might have persevered, learning the deltas and their workarounds (which might have been an incentive to migrate to the native command set). But with two, both broken in different ways, there was no clear correct path.

    Then came vim, with more capability (including language decoration contexts) and only minor deltas. That works for me. I have unix/linux tools/utilities and scripting languages to do as much of the other stuff that emacs provides its users as I'd be likely to use anyhow.

    So I'm a confirmed vithian. Nothing against emacsians: Whatever works for you works for you. vi/vim works for me.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  39. Marketing has improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you think some crappy bootstrap website is an improvement you should consider suicide.

  40. That is called Geany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is called Geany.

    I which /. would add vi keybindings to the comment editor. I know it isn't hard, LH did it about a decade ago (and still has it).

    1. Re:That is called Geany by tepples · · Score: 1

      I which /. would add vi keybindings to the comment editor.

      The comment editor is a <textarea> element. Find or make a browser extension that adds vi keys to <textarea> elements.

  41. I felt a great disturbance in the Force, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... as if millions of Emacs and VI user voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.

  42. A solution in search of a problem. by xymog · · Score: 1

    That is all.

  43. Marketing was never Emacs's problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Marketing and branding have never been the problem; no matter which tech site you go to, it's always swarming with people extolling it and it's one of the most well-known text editor names.
    The trouble is that when you actually try to use it, it's unintuitive, clunky and limited. Yes, there are all kinds of plug-ins for it, and yes, it does contain a programming language that could make it do anything you want and emulate every other editor out there... But why would I beat into working like Notepad++ when I could just use Notepad++, which does everything I need and, importantly, does it easily? (Or KWrite or any other of the dozens of better text editors.)
    And that's assuming I'm not using Visual Studio or Eclipse, which both blow Emacs our of the water, even when the latter is fully lisped out with all the plug-inny bells and whistles.
    The problem has never been branding – it's functionality.

    1. Re:Marketing was never Emacs's problem by colinrichardday · · Score: 0

      Does Notepad++ allow me to compile *.tex files?

    2. Re:Marketing was never Emacs's problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's possible to hook up any compiler you damn well please* and Notepad++ will even automatically detect which one to use based on the file extension.

      * I'm not saying this is necessarily a good idea. If you're coding C++, C#, Java or anything supported by Visual Studio or Eclipse then use that for heaven's sake, because those run circles around both Notepad++ and Emacs and you're only doing yourself a disservice if you're sticking to a text editor.

    3. Re:Marketing was never Emacs's problem by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Eclipse only gave me a terminal window when I attempted to open a LaTex file. I'd be shocked if Visual Studio supported TeX/LaTeX.

    4. Re:Marketing was never Emacs's problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never said you should use Eclipse or Visual Studio for LaTex nor would I recommend that, so what's your point?

    5. Re:Marketing was never Emacs's problem by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      My initial question was about dealing with *.tex files. Why did you respond as you did?

    6. Re:Marketing was never Emacs's problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because although my answer (you can hook up Notepad++ to any compiler) is correct and relevant, people reading it (who are not you and maybe not exclusively interested in LaTex; remember that anyone can read this thread, not just you) might then use it for C++ say, and although that's possible, it's a bad idea, because Visual Studio or Eclipse are better suited for that.

      Would it have killed you to just read back the thread from the beginning before asking a question to which you'd have known the answer if you'd have just read the thread?

  44. We alread have systemd! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We dont need another OS!

  45. Re: What's next? Human sacrifice? by nullchar · · Score: 1

    Everyone wins!