It’s not intuitive at all, and whether or not you use a GUI version doesn’t matter – Emacs’ GUI is very light/thin and not well done at all. ReplyĮmacs is opaque, and incredibly bloated… I agree with J. I haven’t seen customization so extreme it makes pair programming any more difficult. The ClojureBridge organization generally uses NightCode for their introductory workshops as a good compromise between simplicity (of installation as well as of use) and Clojure-friendliness.Īt work, we recommend that if developers want to use Emacs, they at least consider a fairly standardized setup (Prelude - well-documented - with a small suggested customization to make it easy to run Expectations-based tests). If someone is coming to Clojure from Java and they already use Eclipse or IntelliJ, it lightens the learning curve to suggest CCW or Cursive. Different people choose different editors for different reasons. When I first picked up Clojure in 2010, I used TextMate and SublimeText, then CounterClockwise/Eclipse, then back to Emacs, then LightTable for about a year, then I went back to Emacs. I used Emacs 20-ish years ago (the end of 17.x through the start of 19.x) but moved on to other editors and later IDEs. The annual State of Clojure survey continues to indicate Emacs is the most widely used editor in the Clojure community, so I’d agree with Pablo that there’s a very strong sub-current of “pushing Emacs”. The same is true of Stuart Halloway and several others who present regularly about Clojure. It’s hurting us. Even if you are an Emacs power user, when you talk to a Clojure newbie, please, don’t push it down their throats.Įvery time I’ve seen Rich present so far, he’s using a version of Emacs (I believe he was using Aquamacs at one point). Coupling the growth of the language to the use of an editor that is hard to use and non intuitive makes no sense. I do care about the success and popularity of Clojure.
#Aquamacs racket code#
It’s better if they understand Lisp code but it’s not a deal breaker for learning Clojure. If you want to use another editor, so be it. When I compare myself to another clojurian, productivity is generally decided by knowledge of the language and libraries, not the editor. Intellij and Cursive is much easier to use and almost as powerful. Me, personally, I don’t care what editor you use. This is not done by simple statements but by a general culture of jokes saying things such as “you are wrong if you don’t use emacs”. The way Emacs is hurting Clojure is by Clojurians maintaining this myth that you need to use Emacs for Clojure. Other editors these days are also very powerful and although not as much as Emacs, their usage is intuitive so you can achieve a higher level of proficiency just by using it, without spending time and effort in becoming better at it. Human brains are very good at forgetting pain. Learning Emacs or Clojure is hard enough.
#Aquamacs racket how to#
Yeah, most Clojurians know how to use it by now and they suffer from bias: “it’s not that hard” they say. Emacs has a long tradition in the Lisp communities as it’s written, in a big part, in a flavor of Lisp called Emacs Lisp.īecause of its history, it handles Lisp code wonderfully, with automatic correct indentation, paraedit, integration with REPLs, etc. Having said that, I haven't actually done any more yet than test it to see that it works.Emacs is a very powerful text editor and its popularity amongst Clojurians is easily understood. Since there is no version of DrRacket for Android, I am exclusively using Emacs there.
#Aquamacs racket android#
I also have set up a Racket development environment in Termux on my Android tablet. Is there any particular reason to pick one of these over another? I noticed several people at Racketcon using, not Aquamacs, but another GUI version of Emacs.
#Aquamacs racket mac#
I probably could use Emacs on multiple monitors if I used one of the Mac specific GUI versions. So, on the occasions where I want another file open on my second monitor, I have been using Emacs on the main monitor but DrRacket on the second. Also, I have two monitors and Gnu Emacs in the terminal does fine for splitting the screen on one monitor but not so well across two monitors. I still like the features in DrRacket for tracing definitions and use it for that. I was mostly using DrRacket before but now I am mostly using Emacs. That was after you had posted your Venn diagram. I am in transition between DrRacket and Emacs so I checked both of those two, myself. > At 62 response, sadly the histogram doesn't show how many people use two or even three editors. On Feb 26, 2020, at 10:44 AM, Stephen De Gabrielle wrote:
0 kommentar(er)
