public inbox for cygwin-talk@cygwin.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Vim wins again. :)
@ 2015-07-08 20:01 Warren Young
  2015-07-17 12:00 ` Eric Blake
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Warren Young @ 2015-07-08 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List

Those who have been paying attention to the Linux Journal’s Reader’s Choice Awards for years, as I have, watched as Vim continually increased its lead over Emacs to the point that they didn’t even bother asking in the most recent survey.  When they asked in 2013, Emacs was at about 10%, behind Vim, gedit, and Kate:

  http://www.linuxjournal.com/rc2013?page=44

It is interesting to compare those results to the Stack Overflow Developer Survey:

  http://stackoverflow.com/research/developer-survey-2015#tech-editor

You can see the overpowering influence of Windows and OS X here in the top two choices: NotePad++ (blech!) and Sublime Text (yay!).  

Sublime Text is greatly improved by the Vintageous plugin, which allows Sublime to emulate Vim so well that I like it far better than gVim.

  https://github.com/guillermooo/Vintageous

Although I didn’t much mind paying for Sublime Text as a product, I do worry about it disappearing.  Visual Studio Code could woo away enough Sublime users that its developer may simply have to abandon it:

  https://code.visualstudio.com/

Thoughts from the other editor geeks here?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Vim wins again. :)
  2015-07-08 20:01 Vim wins again. :) Warren Young
@ 2015-07-17 12:00 ` Eric Blake
  2015-07-17 17:45   ` Warren Young
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Eric Blake @ 2015-07-17 12:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: cygwin-talk

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1151 bytes --]

On 07/08/2015 02:00 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> Those who have been paying attention to the Linux Journal’s Reader’s Choice Awards for years, as I have, watched as Vim continually increased its lead over Emacs to the point that they didn’t even bother asking in the most recent survey.  When they asked in 2013, Emacs was at about 10%, behind Vim, gedit, and Kate:
> 
>   http://www.linuxjournal.com/rc2013?page=44
> 
> It is interesting to compare those results to the Stack Overflow Developer Survey:
> 
>   http://stackoverflow.com/research/developer-survey-2015#tech-editor
> 

Or this survey on opensource.org:
http://opensource.com/life/15/7/your-preferred-text-editor

All I can say is that these surveys are inherently biased (so it will
never paint a full picture of preference, even if it is probably right
that more people know vi than emacs), nor will it affect my personal
choice (emacs all the way).

> Thoughts from the other editor geeks here?

You should know better than to provoke editor wars :)

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 604 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Vim wins again. :)
  2015-07-17 12:00 ` Eric Blake
@ 2015-07-17 17:45   ` Warren Young
  2015-07-17 18:12     ` Stephen John Smoogen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Warren Young @ 2015-07-17 17:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List

On Jul 17, 2015, at 6:00 AM, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> On 07/08/2015 02:00 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> 
>> Thoughts from the other editor geeks here?
> 
> You should know better than to provoke editor wars :)

I was hoping for thoughtful commentary instead, like your answer. :)

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Vim wins again. :)
  2015-07-17 17:45   ` Warren Young
@ 2015-07-17 18:12     ` Stephen John Smoogen
  2015-07-20 15:37       ` cyg Simple
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen John Smoogen @ 2015-07-17 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List

On 17 July 2015 at 11:45, Warren Young <wyml@etr-usa.com> wrote:
> On Jul 17, 2015, at 6:00 AM, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 07/08/2015 02:00 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>>
>>> Thoughts from the other editor geeks here?
>>
>> You should know better than to provoke editor wars :)
>
> I was hoping for thoughtful commentary instead, like your answer. :)

Then you should have worded your original question better. Pithy
questions get pithy answers.

What exactly do you want to hear from people that isn't something that
has been said since 1986 USENET multiple multiple times.. Emacs does X
better than vi? vi does Y better than emacs? In the end, it is really
about what you the user find better for how your brain works. So you
can't really know that unless you spend a month in each editor trying
to see which one works better for your brain. If notepad++ is what
works best for you then what does it matter that someone else uses
emacs or vi or atom?

-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* RE: Vim wins again. :)
  2015-07-17 18:12     ` Stephen John Smoogen
@ 2015-07-20 15:37       ` cyg Simple
  2015-07-22 14:01         ` Robert Pendell
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: cyg Simple @ 2015-07-20 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 'The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List'

> From: Stephen John Smoogen
> 
> On 17 July 2015 at 11:45, Warren Young <wyml@etr-usa.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 17, 2015, at 6:00 AM, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 07/08/2015 02:00 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thoughts from the other editor geeks here?
> >>
> >> You should know better than to provoke editor wars :)
> >
> > I was hoping for thoughtful commentary instead, like your answer. :)
> 
> Then you should have worded your original question better. Pithy questions get
> pithy answers.
> 
> What exactly do you want to hear from people that isn't something that has
> been said since 1986 USENET multiple multiple times.. Emacs does X better than
> vi? vi does Y better than emacs? In the end, it is really about what you the user
> find better for how your brain works. So you can't really know that unless you
> spend a month in each editor trying to see which one works better for your
> brain. If notepad++ is what works best for you then what does it matter that
> someone else uses emacs or vi or atom?

And then enters the shell command line editor.  One of the first things I do besides set the erase character is to set -o vi.

IDE editors are another source of contention.  Some allow for external process for the editor while others do not.  As Stephen says it is all a matter of preference of which color the bike shed is.  Some like red, others like blue and still others like green and yellow.  That said a comparison of choice doesn't matter and is a waste of publishing ink except that some like Warren love to hear about it and encourages that ink.  None the less my choice is over others is gvim, vim, vi or whatever is available if those are not.

--
cyg Simple


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Vim wins again. :)
  2015-07-20 15:37       ` cyg Simple
@ 2015-07-22 14:01         ` Robert Pendell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Robert Pendell @ 2015-07-22 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 11:37 AM, cyg Simple <> wrote:
>> From: Stephen John Smoogen
>>
>> On 17 July 2015 at 11:45, Warren Young <> wrote:
>> > On Jul 17, 2015, at 6:00 AM, Eric Blake <> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 07/08/2015 02:00 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Thoughts from the other editor geeks here?
>> >>
>> >> You should know better than to provoke editor wars :)
>> >
>> > I was hoping for thoughtful commentary instead, like your answer. :)
>>
>> Then you should have worded your original question better. Pithy questions get
>> pithy answers.
>>
>> What exactly do you want to hear from people that isn't something that has
>> been said since 1986 USENET multiple multiple times.. Emacs does X better than
>> vi? vi does Y better than emacs? In the end, it is really about what you the user
>> find better for how your brain works. So you can't really know that unless you
>> spend a month in each editor trying to see which one works better for your
>> brain. If notepad++ is what works best for you then what does it matter that
>> someone else uses emacs or vi or atom?
>
> And then enters the shell command line editor.  One of the first things I do besides set the erase character is to set -o vi.
>
> IDE editors are another source of contention.  Some allow for external process for the editor while others do not.  As Stephen says it is all a matter of preference of which color the bike shed is.  Some like red, others like blue and still others like green and yellow.  That said a comparison of choice doesn't matter and is a waste of publishing ink except that some like Warren love to hear about it and encourages that ink.  None the less my choice is over others is gvim, vim, vi or whatever is available if those are not.
>
> --
> cyg Simple
>
>

*cough*The people who forgot to remove email addresses from the body*cough*
Anyways I'm a nano person but mostly because it was the first one I
used.  I can use vi(m) with some difficulty.  I've never used emacs
before.


Robert Pendell
A perfect world is one of chaos.
Keybase: http://keybase.io/shinji257

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2015-07-22 14:01 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-07-08 20:01 Vim wins again. :) Warren Young
2015-07-17 12:00 ` Eric Blake
2015-07-17 17:45   ` Warren Young
2015-07-17 18:12     ` Stephen John Smoogen
2015-07-20 15:37       ` cyg Simple
2015-07-22 14:01         ` Robert Pendell

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).