/tech/ - Technology★

Vim is shit because of Unix philosophy.

There is nothing wrong with using plug-ins.

netrw is comfy, spelling is a nice add.

Embrace the bloat, begin with making the perfect statusline plug-in.

Even downloading others' plug-ins isn't something to be ashamed of, some are just good for your use case and not worth rewriting.

The idea of plug-ins is to be "little" scripts which focus on adding one feature. Keep away from these "all-in-one Vim IDE expansions" and it's all good.

>>1047246 only applies if you were talking about plug-ins when talking about "not very unix-y"

>>1047245

> be you

> open computer (presumably windows? I don't know what unixhaters use)

> click thread about Unix philosophy

> become angry

> post

< What did he mean by this?

>>1047246

> Netrw is comfy

< https://github.com/tpope/vim-vinegar/issues/21#issuecomment-39447112

Netrw is filled with bugs and is pretty unreliable. The worst part about it is that even if netrw was a fine piece of software, I ``have`` to use it because It's packaged with vim.

> downloading others' plug-ins isn't something to be ashamed of

The new-age-vim way of doing things seems to be downloading a 300KB .vim file that totally replaces something vim has implemented poorly in 1995. Most plugins aren't autistic unix-y enough either (only work with one tool, forces settings, etc.)

>>1047240 (OP)

>vim

>bloat

>unix philosophy

cuckchan is four doors down

>>1047240 (OP)

It's emacs+evil mode for me.

>>1047249

>something vim has implemented poorly

can you give some examples?

Most of the plug-ins seem to be either a straight clone of a built-in plug-in, or add something Vim doesn't have at all.

For example: autocompletion is really good in Vim, just need to setup stuff like omnicompletion. It's more portable and less resource heavy to change some settings over installing a plug-in mimicking built-in completion functions.

For netrw, I agree, it isn't suited for more than basic browsing. Why need to use those tho? Vim has ex commands for changing file structure.

For basic browsing, netrw is comfy. For other stuff, I use commands anyway.

I heard NERDTree is really good, if you're interested in an alternative.

>>1047253

autocomplete is a decent example of something implemented (pretty) poorly. It's better than nothing and what I've been using for quite a while, but it has little (real) language support and can't understand anything beyond the base language, which is generally what I know already.

>>1047265

Use LSP.

OP is the janitor and has immediately censored the first two posts calling him a hipster faggot because they have offended him. He issued two three day bans for "shitposting", even though this board is pure shitposting.

https://sys.8ch.net/log.php?board=tech

OP is a faggot and he does it for free.

>>1047265

wasn't auto-complete deprecated?

>>1047270

>LSP

pretty good

>>1047265

auto-complete works best for "user-defined" objects like file names, words, lines...

If you do it well, it supports language-specific elements (e.g. auto-complete sub-classes in python, end tags in HTML) and I don't see where it falls short.

It has no color picker or black magic, it just completes from a list.

How is your experience different from this one? what can any plug-in add in actual functionality?

if you want suggestions, you need to be specific about what you're looking for that vim doesn't have.

>>1047240 (OP)

>What do you guys use?

tweak

vim
:$!xxd

doesn't quite cut it for editing binaries

typo

>>1047279

>:$!xxd

:%!xxd

>>1047240 (OP)

> However, I feel as though a few things are happening to it; specifically, more and more people are joining the community, expecting VS-code-like features from their editor.

>>1047274

So what? You don't have to use plugins like coc.nvim which add a whole new layer of bullshit if you don't want to.

>>1047265

>autocomplete is a decent example of something implemented (pretty) poorly.

Auto completion is fine, it's the manual triggering that sucks, but you could make autocommands for that. What really sucks is the fact that omni-completion is synchronous, so you either have to invent your own asynchronous completion (doable), or you suck it down and use one of the completion plugins and save a lot of time.

>>1047274

> what can any plug-in add in actual functionality?

Asynchronicity is be one thing where a completion plugin really helps. If you have your omni completion set up to show as you type and there are a lot of completion candidates it will drive you crazy to see the editor freeze of half a second every time you type a letter. I remember that the guy who made Omnisharp for Vim switched to Emacs because of this.

>>1047272

>OP is the janitor and has immediately censored the first two posts calling him a hipster faggot because they have offended him.

<BO says nothing will ever get deleted

<Janitor allowed to censor his own threads

<good threads get bumplocked while blackpillfags run rampant

<samefagging all over the place due to lack of IDs

<tripcodes were fine though, and the BO didn't mind them shitting up the entire board and has allowed them to continue shitting up the entire board for months because he was angry that anons finally called him out for protecting his internet frewds that were tripfagging

<these are the same people that robbed Terry of money and probably got him killed

</tech/ continues to get worse and worse everyday and any attempt to make another place to have good discussion is instantly flooded by these faggots and any mention of it gets deleted from the board

<excluding the things they shill of course, remember to join Nanochan fellow anons!

Now watch as some faggot comes a long and tells me to take it to /metatech/ where nothing ever gets done. We have IDs over there for some reason though. I guess principles like full anonymity don't matter when it's a place where good ideas go to die.

>>1047272

>>1047292

I am not a janitor; I saw those posts and they were removed without action from me. There are several posters still here making the very persuasive argument that I enjoy consuming penis, so I think the fact that those two just happened to be particularly shit at that task got them removed.

>>1047276

It's not as much features that I'm after than a commitment to the UNIX philosophy . Vim seems to have an ever-expanding list of shittily-implemented features. I'd like an alternative that sticks in its lane and allows content to easily flow in and out of the program. Vim will do this to an extent, but it's a pain and always requires odd Vimscript workarounds, something I'd always enjoy avoiding.

>>1047289

> Auto completion is fine, it's the manual triggering that sucks

Ironically enough, I find it's the exact opposite. There have been plenty of cases of me using VSCode for work where it'll complete `else` to `ElementScanner6` for some reason or another. The problem with vim's autocomplete is that it doesn't support libraries, has limited language support and isn't context-aware.

>>1047270

Best post in this thread

Vim sucks as an editor.

It lacks the abilty that guis have due to it's design all while trying to emulate gui features which often bog down the system instead of helping it.

Emacs + evil mode is the only true editor.

What's wrong with vim? You're worried people are going to force bram to add bloat? Nvim obviously isn't the solution, they stripped away all the platform support (ie good bloat) then added a bunch of useless features. You can't use vi directly, it isn't maintained anymore. If you want an unmaintained vi, might as well use an old branch of vim. If you're going to use some maintained clone of vi, post which one.

Vis and Kakoune i understand are too focused on their fancy editing language, whose features you'll need once a month, that they sacrifice usability in regular editing. Haven't bothered learning them as a result, but I wouldn't expect much less. vi is, despite all the memes, designed to be used by regular people. (:q really isn't that hard to remember). That's why it has such staying power, and that's why an editor meant to show off the author's intelligence won't go anywhere.

>>1047270

>use lsp

is this actually better? I tried it after it got shilled here, but it still couldn't manage to tell me the fields of a struct in c. Maybe I just picked the wrong server.

>>1047309

Bram's already added lots of bloat. Internal spellchecker, autocomplete and netrw are all examples of things that are nice to have in an editor but should be external tools, not part of the editor itself. The common trend these days is to just overwrite them with other tools written in Vimscript, which are generally even more hacked together than the originals, which, given the state of netrw's codebase, is hard to achieve.

I'll agree that kakoune's editing language is pretty impractical (not to mention it adds tons more bloat), but vis actually does have some practical use. Sam's regex is pretty useful when used properly, but vis isn't a mature enough software package to be used realistically.

I really like ne.

http://ne.di.unimi.it/

Does the job and is simple and lightweight but still powerful if you need some more advanced features. I like the customizeable menus for features you maybe need once a month or are not worth some convoluted keyboard shortcut you're gonna forget anyways. You can even make different menus, shortcut files and macro files and give which to open as command argument, so for example write a shell script for different file extensions/editing modes if you like. Also the default keyboard layout is sane, contrary to most terminal-based editors. It has a macros, customizeable syntax highlighting and the ability to send text blocks through external programs and definable keyboard shortcuts but no script language as an editor really does not need a script language. Linux has more than enough tools (awk, sed etc..) to handle streams of text, that together with the ability to process text blocks in an external program is all you really need.

I've used vim for years and vis for a few months and got quite good at that modal stuff, you can do some fancy things sometimes but the truth is that 95% of the time you're gonna end up having to press more keys than you would in a non-modal editor. I feel the whole concept is flawed and overtly complicated for little gain.

If you prefer modal editing to chorded, you might just be a soyboy.

>>1047240 (OP)

You should be concerned because Bram Moolenar uses the donations that vim gets to feed niggers.

>>1047309

The ancient vi can be used since the old at&t source was released by caldera back in ~2000, and since theneit hae been maintained by a guy who calls it "ancient vi".

One of the reasons old vi is so practical and useful is because it was developed in house by a company that paid much money for it, in a time where there were 0 (((sjws, feminazis, soying influences, etc.))) in tech and great optimizations were essential and required, unlike for example, (((electron))), which needs 2 GB of RAM to run a hello world.

>>1047340

s/since theneit hae been/since then it has been

>>1047340

>ancient vi

you mean traditional vi: http://ex-vi.sourceforge.net/ ?

if so:

>terminal too wide

I think this is a little too traditional for me.

>>1047240 (OP)

emacs

why fight it, and once you start with elisp it's an easy gateway into learning lisp in general, it's how I started

>>1047240 (OP)

>Unix philosofy

>Not expecting your text editor to also be a window manager

Just give Emacs a shot and you'll love it, but don't try to use it without customizing it or it's going to suck mega dick. Vim comes with a better out-of-the-box experience than emacs. Take your time to install all the shit you want/need.

>But muh modal editing

Emacs can do that. Use it with Evil-mode or something like Xah-fly-keys.

>inb4 emacs

Indeed.

>>1047365

Also, remap Ctrl and Alt so that your spacebar has Ctrl to its left and Alt to its right. Any other remapping idea like Capslock to Ctrl is going to destroy your fingers and your ass.

>>1047366

that's just dumb

control should be where caps lock usually is and caps lock should be a latching key like in the old days

>>1047358

>>1047365

>vim is too bloated

>what's an alternative to vim with less bloat

<alternative to vim you say? You should use emacs

>fuck off

<of course, the default config is useless, you'll want to install 3000 plugins, including a complete vim emulator, in order to get it marginally useful

<what's a UNIX? What's great about emacs is that it does everything. More features = more better, right?

Learn to read the fucking OP

>>1047374

There's de-bloated Emacs variants.

>>1047384

Then post them faggot. A generic "try emacs" in no way answers the OP.

>>1047384

“De-blating” Emacs defeats the whole fucking point of using Emacs. Stop treating it as just an editor.

>>1047294

>Ironically enough, I find it's the exact opposite. There have been plenty of cases of me using VSCode for work where it'll complete `else` to `ElementScanner6` for some reason or another. The problem with vim's autocomplete is that it doesn't support libraries, has limited language support and isn't context-aware.

Vim provides a framework for hooking up auto-completion and it includes some simple types of auto-completion out of the box (e.g. file paths, words from buffers, spelling correction).

Anything beyond that is and should be handled by plugins. You then hook up the plugin's completion function to the system. Look up ':h compl-omni' for instruction on how to hook up. If your results suck then the omni completion plugin is to blame.

>>1047240 (OP)

textadept

>>1047418

That'd be a great system, but it provides more than 'simple auto-completion'. Vim comes bundled with a 'full' autocomplete framework for a select few languages, which are inconsistent and clearly made for individuals. C completion mandates ctags, while the others don't. They're all abrasive to other libraries and are in generally hard to tweak or edit.

>>1047422

based

>>1047384

>>1047396

>>1047405

XEmacs, MicroEmacs, MicroUmacs (maybe it exists, maybe not), Linus Torvalds's version of MicroE/Umacs 4.something (you can get pre (((code of conduct))) versions), compiling Emacs yourself, etc.

>>1047429

>That'd be a great system, but it provides more than 'simple auto-completion'. Vim comes bundled with a 'full' autocomplete framework for a select few languages, which are inconsistent and clearly made for individuals. C completion mandates ctags, while the others don't. They're all abrasive to other libraries and are in generally hard to tweak or edit.

So? Just get a different completion plugin instead then. Here are two that use clang:

https://github.com/justmao945/vim-clang

https://github.com/Rip-Rip/clang_complete

Isn't that the Unix philosophy? If you don't like the thing that comes bundled just replace it with another thing. It's not like Vim's included tag-based completion is hardwired and you have to use it.

Vim is bloated. Use vi.

Emacs is real software. It has real features, real extensions, a real programming language, and is used by real people for real projects, unlike Vi and Vim which are too obsessed with weenie traditions like preserving bugs and inventing new weenie extension languages because C and the shell suck. Vim extensions suck so much they slow down and freeze your computer when an IBM mainframe from the 70s with 16 MB of memory could run 17,500 3270 terminals at once.

The worst time you if you give up fixing that they get panned for
puny users and programmers", that any fixing C++ or Plan-9, or,
alternately, that and expendable, but nothink Ultrix is any
implemental design flaming about the incidental implemental
design flaws of UNIX.

The problem is that this is that says that any task is really no
more like "uniq" says just running screws all the pointer.  My
personal record is 20 seconds (5 < x < 15) and forth long after
you give used, but it company close (say, literary or anything else,
it -doesn't matter, and less scheduler out of the subject of
unusability by FTPing a file from anothing unix as much about unix
from another machine performance to the unix pietism is that
robustness of even believing that 70% is good enough any other
machine on the retaining screws all the convenience or laziness of
improbity and outright failure are memory than just running disk that
by installing unix pietism is that millions of the minutiae of any
implemental implementation bugs. The minicomputer operating on the
icons will pop out.  

To its individual particular, I would have an articular, I would like "uniq"
says that this many users.)

You left out the way...  or them astounding, no?  The incidental in
dissecting system.  And it run company has a processors, and so on)
at that this matter, asn supports as possible, but God help you if you
have the pointer.  My perspective up picking unix, it makes that 70% is
good enough, that one cornerstone of "system (at best anyone is
surprised.

Makes a Sun-2 running the minutiae of any implementation bugs.
Make that only in the or laziness of a cadre of "system.  And it runs
about a dozen xterms, iconify the icons will keep bouncing back and my
"reading" of unix is an -attitude the pointerrupts worth sh*t.  You can
lower machine paid more heed too - sure, you can put cards in, but God
help you if you give up fixing out the bugs.

The wonder is that they get panned forth long after you give used, but
that by worse. So either you give up fixing them is through an article
separate, as many users.)

You look at the true, original strains of Unix from the more heed to the
same ethernet seem all - IBM.  The icons will keep bouncing back and
for it.

Can you give up picking up every new release. So either you stop waving
display Postscript seem astounding Fathers hadn't expressed more
profitable at a moment's only is that the microprocessors, and attitude
that there microprocessor crowd (who are seemingly -incapable- o).

>I want to stop using Vim because the other people who use it like different things

Do you understand how stupid that sounds? Just continue using Vim you absolute nigger. That's like moving to another city because Bob from another neighbourhood said he prefers having three floors in his house rather than one.

>>1047572

Come on, Lisp-poster, even you can't defend ELisp like that. They should've focused on porting the whole thing to Guile a long time ago.

EMACS = BLOAT

>>1047374

This. Emacs never ever.

>>1047384

No.

>>1047240 (OP)

>cuckime

Use gvim.

>>1047587

cuckime is cuckime. Let's see Makise Kurisu does not fuck Okabe. So it is cuckime.

>>1047607

>super/meta/control/spacebar/control/meta/super

Makes so much more sense than how modern keyboards do it.

Instead of having to use your pinky, your thumbs do the work.

>>1047240 (OP)

use ed fgt

>>1047473

The Xemacs install without any configuration is already more bloated than the enhanced vim install. They probably come out equal if you tack on gvim. Xemacs may be non-bloated for an emacs, but it is still very bloated for a text editor.

However, I downloaded linus' uemacs, and it actually looks decent. Minimal code base, pragmatic design, I glanced through the code and it looks well written (wouldn't expect less from torvalds). The best part? Not a line of lisp to be seen. It could definitely be a candidate.

>>1047621

The problem is that there's no UTF-8 aware µemacs. And I use mg on my remote boxes.

>>1047624

https://github.com/torvalds/uemacs/commit/0e9fc2be15b0926dfee08846c906cd3b2668878a

not utf-8 aware is an exaggeration, although it doesn't have complete support.

>>1047621

The :help function is like 90% of the enhanced vim install

>>1047614

It's not even that. Instead of having keyboard shortcuts, you just have dedicated keys.

>>1047240 (OP)

Visual Studio Code.

VI is great for the editing of one small file but is terrible for navigating many files in a project, all other console based editors suffer this. Join the New World and use a GUI editor for real programming.

>cuckime

>>1047240 (OP)

Just get a life and stop worrying about text editors anon

>>1048057

If your software needs an IDE to be manageable, there's something wrong in it. Most of the time, that thing is object cult.

>>1048057

>navigating many files

see >>1035774 (spoiler: terminals are best for that too)

>>1048185

everyone would use it then but its not true so they wont.

>>1048186

>Argumentum ad populum

why aren't you using windows then? And while your at it, hop off to the much more popular >>>/g/ and leave us in peace.

>>1048188

and you can go back to reddit. only they put those words in their posts

>>1048192

>yeah well your a redditor. so there!

great response

>>1048082

But then I'd have to realize I'm bad at everything. If my editor is esoteric enough, I'll look cool around my friends.

>>1047615

>>1047566

>>1047556

There's at least one person on this board who has gone off the deep end and unironically uses one of these full-time.

>>1047582

>>1048060

Why tf do you go to an imageboard (concept created in japan) if you're so insulted by the idea of anime?

>>1047573

Vim is FOSS, so when problems come up, the vim community will be the ones fixing the issues. If their go-to response to any problem is "Just install another plugin on top of the editor", then vim will just keep adding bloat instead of solving the actual issues at hand.

>>1047514

One of those plugins was written in python, which now requires me to not only compile vim with python but wait for the python code to run whenever I want to use autocomplete, and the other literally refers you to YouCompleteMe, which is also written in python and requires (you guessed it), more plugins to work! Built-in functionality isn't mean to be replaced, so when it is replaced, it adds even more bloat, plus the code which now sits unused.

>>1048226

>Why tf do you go to an imageboard (concept created in japan) if you're so insulted by the idea of anime?

I don't like cuckime. Why the fuck taiga aisaka beats the shit out of ryuji and ryuji still cleans and cooks for her? Is that not cuckime? Why is haruhi such a bitch? Is that not cuckime?

VSCode + VsCodeVim

>>1048033

Well, the super key is rarely used, so it should be put off to the side. Alt is used less often than control, so it comes next. Then control being right next to the spacebar is perfect, as you simply have to slide your thumb a bit to the left/right to hit it.

I also change capslock to alt, for the occasions when you have to do control and alt together.

>>1048339

>slide your thumb

you should mash silghtly above your palm instead

>>1048226

>One of those plugins was written in python, which now requires me to not only compile vim with python but wait for the python code to run whenever I want to use autocomplete

Yes, recompiling the editor is bullshit, which is why Neovim allows you to retrofit the editor with Python support instead. Run 'pip install pynvim' and you get Python support without having to recompile anything. If performance is an issue use an asynchronous completion plugin (I use NCM2), you won't notice the time it takes to get completions.

https://github.com/ncm2/ncm2

https://github.com/ncm2/ncm2-pyclang

> and the other literally refers you to YouCompleteMe

It uses YCM for comparison, it does not require you to use YCM. YCM is a pretty clever idea, it was trying to do what LSP does before LSP was a thing, but it has a lot of complexity which made it hard to install and maintain.

>>1048226

> Built-in functionality isn't mean to be replaced, so when it is replaced, it adds even more bloat, plus the code which now sits unused.

And what is the alternative? Include everything and the kitchen sink by default? Vim is a text editor, it edits text. Some people have more advanced needs, like language-specific context-aware completion. Do you want Vim to ship with a language server for every obscure language? Now that would be bloat, not to mention that it would always be outdated because there is no way Bram could take care of them all.

Something similar happened to support for other scripting languages; if you want to use Python you'll be pretty current, but when it comes to something more niche like Racket no one will be around to maintain it and you'll have a bunch of useless rotten code in Vim. Neovim made the wise decision to rip it all out. You can now just install the Racket client separately instead, and when it doesn't work go bother its author. That is easier to maintain and it doesn't bloat the installation of all the people who have no intention of ever using Racket.

>>1047240 (OP)

>Few people are really interested in the Unix philosophy that made vim such a powerful tool to begin with.

Good. The Unix philosophy is shit, and Vim is getting better by the day. Since version 8, for example, it now finally has a proper package manager, making Pathogen and the like completely obsolete.

If you want a bare-bones vi implementation, which "does one thing and one thing well", just use nvi. But since it's clear that you actually want features, and not a bare-bones implementation, honestly vim is still the best vi-like editor out there overall. All the others suffer from either poor maintenance or missing features, which the author deemed unimportant, but turns out, users don't find them that unimportant.

That said, I'm sorry for your inb4, but now that evil-mode has gotten this good, you should really use emacs.

>>1047240 (OP)

Most of the features in Vim can be excluded at compile-time anyway, so if you are worried about muh "bloat", just use a minimal Vim build.

>>1048372

I agree that vim shouldn't include everything, it should include fewer features, and that nvim is moving on the right direction. The problem arises when vim tries to include things with it. When you include something like autocomplete by default (which vim does), it becomes hard to replace with other tools, therein violating the Unix philosophy. Rather than provide features, Vim should focus more on making itself more extendable. Tools like ncm2 and YCM are large pieces of software to begin with, which makes the fact that they're replacing software Bram already wrote in the '90s even less tolerable.

>>1048519

> When you include something like autocomplete by default (which vim does), it becomes hard to replace with other tools

Not really, look up ':h completion-functions'. The documentation is all over the place though, which is one thing I hate about Vim's manual. I wish there was a section that explains how all those parts actually fit together. All you need to do is ignore what Vim ships with and put the parts together the way you like. Plugins like ncm2 just place an extra layer on top of that so you don't have to tie it all together yourself. If you don't like ncm2 you can tinker with components yourself instead.

emacs is for tetris kek

Got tired of VIM and the plugin management, so decided to play with nvi.

It's possible to send text from nvi to the clipboard, but it's a little tricky.

nvi for quick edits/TODO lists/practicing C++ and Lisp

PyCharm+VIM keybinds for Python

>>1047240 (OP)

unironically use acme

>>1047240 (OP)

The alternative is to stop being a hipster faggot.

>>1047240 (OP)

>>inb4 emacs

Sorry fam, it's time to grow out of the pseudo-minimalist phase and use good software to do real work.

>>1047240 (OP)

literally use leafpad. text editing in the terminal was never efficient. even leafpad already is almost on par with vim despite lacking any features outside of basic text editing ability, because it doesn't make you work around the fact that there's no mouse (yes i know you can add yet another hack to make mouse "work" in vim)

>>1049488

>(yes i know you can add yet another hack to make mouse "work" in vim)

When the hack becomes complete enough, it ceases to be a hack and becomes a proper feature. There is nothing fundamental about the terminal that separates it from a GUI server. Both consist of an input/output stream pair with a standard interface. You can do true color. You can do images. And you sure as shit can do mouse. Terminal editors are spartan by choice, since the majority of features that IDE fags beg for are already better implemented in other parts of the shell.

>>1049260

this. you can learn the entire program in an afternoon and is functionally equivelant to the parts of emacs that aren't gimmicky time wasters.

do you use acme-sac?

>>1049527

<acme

<functionally equivelant to the parts of emacs that aren't gimmicky time wasters.

This is what cat-v weenies believe.

I was in a similar position to you, OP, but in the end, adding shit to Vim to try and get it to work more as an IDE is just a waste of time. I just bit the bullet and started using Emacs for IDE work.

Before you

>bloat

at me, do take note that I do strongly feel that Emacs is not a good editor. You're asking for carpal tunnel with the default keybinds. However, it does work better for that sort of VS-Code-like shit you want. Using packages with Emacs works a million times better, and if you install evil-mode, then you get all the nice keybinds that vim has in a less-cobbled-together environment. That being said, i still do use vim for editing, it's still much, much faster to open st and type in vim than opening Emacs and waiting for it to load. The right tool for the right job, imo.

>>1049540

>However, it does work better for that sort of VS-Code-like shit you want.

OP literally said she DOESN'T want this shit and whats to reduce muh bloat.

>>1049523

>There is nothing fundamental about the terminal that separates it from a GUI server.

heh

>Both consist of an input/output stream pair with a standard interface

lol

>You can do true color. You can do images. And you sure as shit can do mouse.

lmao

>the majority of features that IDE fags beg for are already better implemented in other parts of the shell

lmfao

>>1049543

>she

Fair enough point though, am retarded and dont know how to read.

However, my point that Vim per se works best by itself does stand. Both Vim and Neovim work fine for that, there's not much difference if you'll just use them as an editor for config files and stuff.

I have, however been trying nvi on my netbook recently. It's way more spartan than the previously mentioned vi clones are. If you're really serious about avoiding 'muh bloat', consider that.

>>1049548

Presumably you're under the impression that all those library functions calls in your gui framework just magically make things appear on the screen, and magically make your button events fire. When you create an X session, you create a socket pair to commmunicate with the X server. Every time you call a function to create a new widget, the call is being serialized into a string of bytes and sent into the sockets. Every time someone clicks one of your buttons, their mouse coordinates are being encoded into an event and sent back to you. There are a number of libraries that allow you to treat the terminal exactly like a gui - you draw frames and buttons and text boxes, subscribe to events, and paint everything pretty colors.

If you think I'm lying, or speaking in theoreticals, look at urwid for python. Some idiot has sat down and written a framework for addressing a terminal exactly like you would a gui window. I have yet to see a real program use it, for the simple reason that no one who uses a terminal wants any of that crap - but it exists, and it works.

>>1049558

woah there's an xserver??? shit I guess it fundamentally is a terminal then.

>urwid

It's like some kind of terminal user interface. What will they think of next?

>>1047240 (OP)

>vim

>doing one thing well

That's Vi you're talking about, definitely not Vim.

>>1049574

>it fundamentally is a terminal then.

x was designed to be used over a network. You have a single mainframe, connected to a number of thin clients, otherwise known as terminals.

You can upgrade ssh from simple text to operating full guis over the network with a single flag. These parallels are not simple coincidences.

>>1049630

lol so your definition of terminal is anything that sends/receives information. ok

>>1048339

On what 'level' did you switch the keys? I've done the same thing as you but for X only, still getting confused every time I have to use the login shell.

>>1049748

I have an .xmodmad config I use.

>>1049734

You seem to be under the impression that mouse support in some terminals is a hack, and in others it isn't. It's implemented exactly the same in all of them.

>>1047572

What language is that mail written in?

>>1048165

t. 21 year old Cs student who wrote a calculator once

>>1050765

Because it's an inferior Emacs by now.

>>1051172

>install emacs

>install 6000 plugins to get the vim experience back

>vim is an inferior emacs by now

>>1051192

Why would you ever want to get back to the "vim experience" in the first place?

The only good thing about it is the keybindings, which didn't even invent, by the way: that was Vi. And for that, you have Evil mode.

>>1051224

>The only good thing about it is the keybindings

vim is a keyboard based editor. It is the keybindings

>which it didn't even invent, by the way: that was Vi

except for all the things vim added. gg for one

>And for that, you have Evil mode.

evil mode a shit

>>1051234

>omg it replaced 1G with gg, revolutionary

>>1051249

>Just add a few more modifiers and stretch your fingers more

This is your brain on emacs

>be spending all your time turning editor into an OS end up killing yourself due to RSI from 'comfy/efficiency'

>be spending all your time learning keybinds so you end up having to use only programs that have those keybinds and you kill yourself due to discovering the keybinds are pretty ass

The fence is the best editor you faggots.

>>1051253

>>1051234

You can just map 1G to a key, for example add this to your .exrc:

:map g 1G

Vim is pointless bloat. Use nvi.

You should be able to do this

>>1050765

only thing that the user needs to know about vi is that you hit esc some times(because it might be in some random mode if you tried to type something and :q! wont work then) and then type :q! and remove it from your system after doing that.

>>1051904

>delete vi

/g/o get detailed guides on how to delete it here >>>/g/

>>1050765

Can I at least get a hint plz thanks.

>>1051915

no. vi is a terrible editor that i only tolerate on embedded devices and even on them i hate how it wont allow typing any text by default and how trying to delete text often does something unexpected.

>>1051929

>vi is a terrible editor

>and how trying to delete text often does something unexpected.

>I don't know how to use it because I am nigger & can't-into-command-line

I know.

>>>/g/ awaits you.

I use emacs but since you kindly asked me to fuck off I have other alternatives:

Nano, it even has syntax highlighting and what's I consider the best about is that you always have the shortcuts listed below so you don't have to remember anything. What more do you need?

>>1051944

if i have to spend hours learning how it works then it sucks. something like nano is so simple that it requires no learning and does everything better. after all i usually just want to change something in a config file from true to false or similar simple things and vi makes that way too hard.

just use nano

>>1051989

>>1051968

>>1051990

lmao what's even the use case for nano? ricing gentoo or something.

>>1051989

I spent a couple of minutes to learn how to edit files in Vim. All I needed to learn was how to switch modes, how to move the cursor, copy/paste, insert text, overwrite text, delete lines, save files and quit. It didn't take long and I don't use Vim as my normal text editor. My main editor is Atom.

>>1051989

>nano is so simple that it requires no learning and does everything better

You admitted do not know vi.

You claim another editor "does everything better" than vi. Like fuck you'd know.

Also...

>it requires no learning

lazy nigger detected

>>>/g/ it's where you belong

>>1052028

its not good if i need to know something. i just want to edit a simple text file not spend time learning how to use the text editor. with nano i can do just that but vi is intentionally designed so that it cant be used without reading the manuals first.

>>1051929

nvm got it but now I have to brute the other damn one

>>1052028

I am not the on you're replying to bu

vi is too similar to vim so whenever I use it and attempt to use vim's features I get angry. Sometimes the cursor disappears and in general is fucking buggy. Nano just werks and does its job.

>>1051995

It's an editor and does its job as an editor, vim has buffers and nice ways of navigations which you could consider bloat lmao.

>>1052045

>its not good if i need to know something

/tech/ 2019

It's niggers like this that lower the quality of the board. Not only does it not understand why this is bad - it would actually attempt to defend it's position as valid. Shameful.

>>1052062

If you ask for a defense, the most you'll get is something about weenies and brain damage.

>>1052059

He should use ed then. I hear it's the standard text editor.

>>1051989

>if i have to spend hours learning how it works then it sucks

How many hours did you spend in school as a kid, learning any number of things you never used again. Now you're an adult, you plan on using an editor for several hours a day, and you aren't willing to spend one hour going through vimtutor?

>something like nano is so simple that it requires no learning

Nano has all the shortcuts listed along the bottom. Get a vim cheatsheet and it will easier still to learn, on account of choosing more sensible defaults, and being easier to configure.

>>1052073

but using vim is not healthy. those people end up wanting everything with the same keybinds and cant use normal programs anymore. i dont want to end up like them.

>>1052097

Maybe they like those keybinds for a reason, faggot.

>>1052109

they do it because they used so much time to learn how to use vim

>>1052113

as if there is an escape. You either learn emacs keybinds or vim.

>>1051989

>>1052113

Why do people like vi keybindings so much? Simple, they keep your fingers around the home row and encourage logically stringing together simple commands to perform more complex actions. They're a dream for grokkers and power users, and they carry over surprisingly well to other software too.

You're comparing a toy editor for newfags with an expressive power tool: both are aimed at very different people with different needs. You might as well complain that a violin is hard to learn and insist people only enjoy playing it because they wasted so much time learning it.

>>1052127

A musical instrument is the end goal. The issue with editors is how much they represent the end goal.

>>1052127

cuz they're faggots that were born with no thumbs

fuck modal niggers

Lots of shills in this thread.

Wow. Just wow.

Europeons need to burn in a tar-pit. Disgusting

Oof, the racism in this thread!

Mods are kikes. Why are they deleting my posts?

>>1057471

The hapa spammer, probably.

>>1057916

Hi anon... Well... Would you tell me please... Uhm...

How to handle these )))))) in LISP?

i would like a very basic editor, something like nano, but where i can see column number. any tips?

>>1057935

Micro. If you want something really light, maybe ne.

>>1057938

Nobody bought them.

>>1057938

thanks. will check them out.

>>1057931

You can install parinfer, available in MELPA. It automatically writes your parens and indents them, and with some other package like rainbow-delimiters you can immediately see and control your parens without any hassle.

https://github.com/DogLooksGood/parinfer-mode

>>1057916

Based and emacspilled.

>>1057935

in vi, to turn on line numbers:

:set nu

>>1057991

>It automatically writes your parens and indents them, and with some other package like rainbow-delimiters you can immediately see and control your parens without any hassle.

Thanks, I'll check it out. But schouldn't a LISP master know how to do it without extensions? Is it even possible?

>>1057916

>uganda editor

top kek

>>1057916

Teledildonics wave of the future

>>1057916

Please don't link Xah Lee, he's retarded.

>>1057916

I just installed Emacs.

Do I have to start watching Raildex now?

>>1058035

>Thanks, I'll check it out. But schouldn't a LISP master know how to do it without extensions? Is it even possible?

You can technically write Lisp without plugins, but why would you want to manually insert matching parentheses in any programming language? I have delimitMate on Vim for that.

>>1058150

Ok I see the point.

I'm just having problems with matching parens, while learning scheme and I thought at certain level of LISP wizardry, you just know where exactly to place a new expression, without breaking anything. Is that type of formatting good?

>>1058137

I think Index is fucking atrocious. Railgun is ok.