HN user

rmurri

65 karma

[ my public key: https://keybase.io/rmurri; my proof: https://keybase.io/rmurri/sigs/RQRXgNRZjw9z-dCyYz9vNuR2HqBsITCJL54Bk4zK3Ok ]

Posts1
Comments57
View on HN
Firefox 118 3 years ago

I don't know about TST, but sidebery can alter your window title when it's active, so you can match css rules against it.

    #main-window[titlepreface*="Sidebery"] #TabsToolbar {
      visibility: collapse !important;
    }

It's not merely nostalgia or availability. I continue to use emacs because it has the features that I want, where other software does not.

Some things I want out of an editor:

* Never having to touch the mouse in any way.

* The ability to customize any feature for my current project or mindset on a whim.

* No UI, as much as possible. Show me the content I'm editing and nothing else.

* A good, extensible, set of keybindings with a bunch of features for editing of raw text

I run my project in an IDE and will sometimes use a feature, but I generally don't develop there.

Reproducibility and peace of mind! There's nothing worse that getting woken up at 3:30 AM and realizing that it'll probably take a few hours to rebuild a server because it's dead and not coming back.

When infrastructure is code, you just spin up a new machine...no thinking involved. Also, since you're used to deploying this way, the process is smooth and as quick possible.

When you build the server by hand...you're often searching around for old ssl certificates, installing packages you forgot were dependencies, etc. Takes a long time to get it right.

If you're skeptical of the cost/benefit of the approach, you realize really quick that it's worthwhile when stuff starts to fail. Especially if it happens more than once.

I don't think the intent is to do code review from email. The idea would be to send the merge request through email, which is then imported into your local git as a branch. Then you're able to do review/analysis/etc with whichever git tooling you prefer.

Yes and no. I generally don't recommend emacs to everybody by default because I've come to realize it's not what everybody wants. Until people want to have a powerful, customizable editor I recommend something pretty and user friendly. Perhaps sublime text, where they can ease into being productive.

That said, I do definitely recommend it to people on a case by case basis (Power users, command line gurus, mouse haters, etc). Those who make it over the initial learning hump tend to really love it.

Magit user here.

I am both comfortable with git on the command line and through emacs. I prefer magit mostly because of its contextual support. With the command line, each command can derive no context from the last command. With magit, it's easy to drill in and see more relevant data (or edit that data) quicker and easier.

Just wanted to point out that not everybody is merely looking for an easier experience, or one that looks prettier.

I used to really love the idea of GUI front end editors. I tried to use a few different ones for building different apps. They worked great for static UIs. What I learned is that I never actually build static UIs, and I was spending tons of time on the GUI. I dumped each when I realized that building from code was far more productive.