Emacs > vim

  • ZephrC@lemm.ee
    18·
    1 year ago

    :q!

    You wouldn’t want to ruin your file by accidentally saving your random flailing.

  • Cableferret@lemmy.tf
    17·
    1 year ago

    A: you’re wrong, Vim over Emacs every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

    B: what’s so damned hard about alt+f4, open up Google, spend the next two weeks googling Vim lessons and Vim tutors and reading length articles about vim commands, and then finally coming back to Vim just to type :wq?

  • ZILtoid1991@kbin.social
    11·
    1 year ago

    Vim users entering a hadouken, a mortal kombat fatality, and their social security number to do simple tasks (much easier than pressing the function keys (take up too much space) or clicking a menu (GUI bad)).

  • tal@kbin.social
    7·
    1 year ago

    I prefer emacs too, but:

    • Emacs’s C-x C-c isn’t likely any more able to leverage knowledge from other environments than vi’s :wq. I guess you could be using a graphical version of emacs and use the menus.

    • On my system, current versions of vim do appear, by default, to show a screen telling you how to quit. A test of emacs -Q to bring up a default emacs environment in a terminal environment doesn’t appear to do that. It instead directs you to the “C-h C-a about emacs page”, which isn’t likely to help beginners. It probably should at least reference the top-level help at C-h C-h or the tutorial at C-h C-t.

    • There are text-mode menus in emacs, but I normally use emacs in the terminal with the menus hidden and don’t use them. F10 will cause them to drop down, but I’m not sure how intuitive that is. looks further Okay, using emacs -Q to test a vanilla environment, it does look like the menus are visible by default in the terminal. If you’re in an environment with mouse support enabled - it looks like gpm in a Linux console works, but curiously-enough, it doesn’t seem to work in urxvt, xterm, or gnome-terminal for me – but at least in some terminal environments, you can use the mouse to operate the terminal-mode menus, so I guess ease-of-use point for emacs there.

    EDIT: It does look like there’s a GTK-based vim that has graphical menus these days, so vim can probably do the menu thing too, but at least on my system, when I launch it, I get a regular terminal vim instance.

    • 23kcarlson@reddthat.com
      3·
      1 year ago

      If I can help it, I’m not editing more than a few lines in terminal. Definitely using nano if I am doing something in terminal though

  • bl_r@beehaw.org
    4·
    1 year ago

    Emacs is one of the better desktop environments I’ve used. I just wish it had a good text editor.

      • bl_r@beehaw.org
        2·
        1 year ago

        I fully agree, I used doom emacs for a year before going back to vim. I loved it, but after a lot of thinking I realized that I was getting too distracted by its many shiny features and that I was only using it for the vim bindings, therefore everything else is bloat.

        I would never be upset using doom emacs, which is significantly more than I could say about other editors/ides.

  • dustyCheese@beehaw.org
    4·
    1 year ago

    This is why real ones use Emacs as their web browser, window manager, note taker, terminal emulator, and file manager. Oh also you can use it to edit text Emacs truly is the best

  • rDrDr@lemmy.world
    3·
    1 year ago

    I learned vim first, and I genuinely have no idea how to use the user friendly editors like nano or whatever. I’m not a developer, but I know how to :wq.