https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/Evil
vi in emacs. Aptly named. But I suppose if your fingers have learned that abomination, you might like it. Mine won't. Ever.
Wha? Abomination? Preposterous! It's just different, have you heard of exploring different things? Much fun!
Unless your fingers lost their dexterity, in which case sorry for teasing... though they probably wouldn't have, if you have used vim...
Heh. All in fun. You learned the editor you learned. I won't engage in a vi vs. emacs war. Not to mention all the new boys on the block.
It does always surprise me, though, that Stallman's editor doesn't install by default in most current distributions of Stallman's operating system, but vi does. Fortunately, for me, it's as far away as "sudo apt install emacs".
It also amazes me that a pretty nice portable assembler (C), with a weird pre-processor (C++), is still the source code for huge parts of the computer ecosystem. But that's an even bigger war.
That kind of wars only exists in the minds of those who wage them. It's funny how you say that you won't engage, while very much engaging. Was that the joke?
C is a terrible portable assembler, it doesn't even have addition with carry or long multiplication. Hopefully C++ would fix it... in another 20 years...
@namark @billstclair
If it were all about well thought out well designed language we might all be using Ada.
I might take a look at Pharo which is supposed to be a SmallTalk.
Anything, as long as it isn't on the JVM. That's been the irritating thing about Clojure with every little error dumping me a huge java back trace.
@billstclair @namark pretty sure that is how it works. I don't remember it being any different before. Reason enough to hate on it :)
I haven’t used Clojure, and I last used Java in 2006, but your stack trace problem sounds like a bug in Clojure’s debugging tools, showing you the compiled-to language stack, instead of the logical lisp stack.