News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by monkmartinez on Sunday June 02, 2013 @07:42PM (#5810565)
I'm not sure about you, but the level of effort required to keep my emacs.d up to date and the level of effort required for each project has turned me away from emacs as my main development environment.
Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by jlarocco on Monday June 03, 2013 @02:57AM (#5811791)
I don't really understand your comment.

What are you doing with emacs.d that requires a burdensome level of effort to keep it "up to date"? What does that even mean? I've been using Emacs almost 10 years, and I very infrequently modify my emacs.d, and I don't know many people who do. Sure, I could spend a lot of time tweaking it and messing around with it, but it'd be an entirely self inflicted thing, and not the fault of Emacs. I could spend all day fiddling with .vimrc, or the Visual Studio settings, too.

I also don't understand the what you mean by "the level of effort required for each project" in the context of Emacs. What "project"s are you talking about?

Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by philsnow on Sunday June 02, 2013 @08:09PM (#5810640)
How much effort do you have to put in to keep your .emacs.d up to date ?

I only started using emacs in emacs 22, so I haven't had to keep things working for 5-10 major releases like I'm sure some people have, but my init.el and .emacs.d have been pretty static the whole time.

Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by monkmartinez on Sunday June 02, 2013 @09:31PM (#5810843)
Do you follow @melpa_emacs on twitter? Packages are not static by a loooooong shot. I am mainly interested in using emacs for Python, Org-mode, JS, HTML. In terms of years of use, I am on year three or so... but I like to keep my shit on lock. My biggest mistake was trying Pycharm. Now I constantly compare Emacs to Pycharm... and it just doesn't compare.
Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by philsnow on Monday June 03, 2013 @01:02AM (#5811482)
I build my emacs from trunk every ~1-3 months for No Good Reason (tm), and I scarcely ever have anything in my own configuration (init.el, custom.el, various random things I've installed in ~/.emacs.d) break.

(I also edit python in emacs regularly, not sure what's changed in the last N years)

Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by easytiger on Monday June 03, 2013 @05:10AM (#5812154)
if you don't need the features or bug fixes don't upgrade. You simply have status anxiety
Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by jamii on Sunday June 02, 2013 @08:23PM (#5810683)
I just use emacs-live (https://github.com/overtone/emacs-live) with a few tweaks (https://github.com/jamii/emacs-live-packs) so most of the work is done by someone else.
Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by gbog on Sunday June 02, 2013 @08:16PM (#5810663)
Same with vim, if you add every fantastic and absolutely necessary tweak you read on the blogs, you get somethin much slower than eclipse in a week.
Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by irahul on Monday June 03, 2013 @03:46AM (#5811924)
> Same with vim, if you add every fantastic and absolutely necessary tweak you read on the blogs, you get somethin much slower than eclipse in a week.

I am not sure what you mean by "every tweak" but fwiw:

    $ ls ~/.vim/bundle | wc -l 
    45

    $ wc -l ~/.vimrc 
    401 /home/rahul/.vimrc


    $ vim --startuptime vim.log

    $ ruby -ne 'print if 2..7 or $. == 151' vim.log

    times in msec
    clock   self+sourced   self:  sourced script
    clock   elapsed:              other lines

    000.810  000.810: --- VIM STARTING ---
    217.536  000.003: --- VIM STARTED ---
> you get somethin much slower than eclipse in a week.

In a week? 6 years and counting.

Re:Emacs is Dead (2010) by nahreally on Sunday June 02, 2013 @08:35PM (#5810713)
I just use Elpa, cross my fingers, and try not to tweak or memorize too many things. I am rather happy like that.