Re: [dev] Plain text editor that sucks less - an alternative to VIM?

From: Dimitris Zervas <dzervas_AT_dzervas.gr>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 18:07:15 +0300

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

>> 1. Most vim bindings (not all, but most), just altered a bit in the
>way they behave.
>Ok, just use vi or vim or some other similar editor.
Ok, so you're just telling me to use a particular editor because of the bindings.
So you may also use windows just for the white cursor...

>> 2. Fantastic syntax highlighting
>This may be considered harmfull in general. [0]
I'll seriously think of it. It convinced me. I'll try it.

>> 3. Fantastic auto-completion (a small menu appears while you type and
>you press tab to accept or ctrl/alt to navigate).
I will also reconsider this.

>> 4. Code folding
>> 5. Snippet/template support
>These features are just to support boilerplate and other sucky coding
>habits. The complexity should be managed by the programming language,
>that's what it's there for, not the editor. The need of aforementioned
>features is merely a symptom of deeper issues within the code.
But these, not. I will not rewrite the same code 5000 times. How many time have you written an eprintf function?
Or maybe create a library (and link to path etc.) which contains 5 functions and you use one. Nope, snippet support and comment templating (disclaimer or function explanation)
I can't see anything bad with code folding. Just fold those 2 functions that have nothing to do with what you search

>> 6. Documentation while you type
>>
>> They may seem a lot and difficult, but they already exist here and
>there, just not all compiled in a suckless way.
>> I've tried most of the said editors and I simply can't live without
>my beloved vim bindings.
>I don't know if there's a suckless way to implement these. LLVM could
>be
>a way to implement some of those features without code duplication with
>compiler frontends, alas being C++, not suckless.
Why C++? To do a quick search in the documentation and render the text beautifully?

>> We NEED a new editor.
>To an extent, I agree. There are some real issues regarding a
>suckless implementation of the editor (curses and most UI-toolkits
>suck). I think most of the features listed are a non-issue. However,
>an editor implemented with suckless technologies would be nice, but
>the actual issues are not within the editor, but in the enviroment
>that surrounds it.
I totally agree that courses suck (I even did a topic to reimplement such toolkit).
But, terminal graphics really comfort me. You don't have to bring up X to make a change in a file. I can edit any file from the comfort of my editor, and not pivot between editors.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: APG v1.1.1
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=QhbQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Sun Jun 29 2014 - 17:07:15 CEST