omaranto

> I'm still impressed with it in other areas.

You mean in areas you are less expert in? :) Maybe it's bad at everything, but each person can only tell when it comes to their own area of expertise.

I don't think GP said anything about making demands. They said they avoid using that piece of software and that is not a demand on the software's author.

I'm not sure what you mean. If you are asking whether either Vim or Emacs use treesitter for syntax higlighting of LaTeX files, the answer is no at least not by default.

Haha! I didn't recognize your user name or domain name and when you mentioned seamless access to command-line tools I almost recommended Álvaro Ramírez's dwim-shell-commands package to you. Glad I clicked the link first. ;)

Zed! That's a blast from the distant past! I enjoyed this 1980 paper about its development: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/spe.43801001...

EDIT: I just saw in my own comment history that I knew (but forgot) there is a more recent Zed text editor which is probably the one you meant.

Speed definitely depends on use cases. I switched from Vim to Emacs because Vim's syntax highlighting in LaTeX files was so slow it lagged behind my typing (and I am not a fast typist!). This is a well-known problem in Vim and the manual even has a section about it (see :help tex-slow). Emacs was perfectly snappy for LaTeX and I didn't want to use one editor for LaTeX and another for everything else, so I just switched to Emacs for everything.

You understood the joke, you just didn't find it funny.

It's true that Mathematica has more polish than Sage, but conversely Sage has vastly more pure math functionality than Mathematica (Mathematica seems to me to have focused on data analytics and neglected mathematics), so the projects just have different focus.

> It's just not fun to write a table in a plain text editor.

Try writing a table in Emacs Org Mode before you say that!

Probably to keep people from asking that it be rewritten in Rust.

I know this is unimportant, but the phrase is "¿Por qué no los dos?".

Is it caled Zed because it is inspired by the old Zed text editor? https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/spe.43801001...

> lexical scoping [...] do you know, whether package authors now use it often or maybe even more than dynamic scoping?

All non-ancient packages use lexical scope. Most ancient packages anyone cared about were converted.

I don't think it's fair that you got down-voted for not knowing what Lisp-style interactive development offers beyond what ipython or jupyter offers. Many people don't know either and the proper response would be to explain, not to down-vote.

EDIT: I was made aware of the guidelines to not comment on voting, I apologize.

I think they are almost always pretty close to inflation, and have been both slightly below and slightly above it at different points in time.

I was (pleasantly) surprised to see that the analogous website for Mexico, where you buy government-issued bonds called Cetes, is significantly less confusing to use. That is not at all what I expect when comparing government websites between my native Mexico and the US! (Paying taxes is another example of something with much, much better UI/UX in Mexico, but there probably are not many other examples.)

Also, the refunds for Cetes when you go over the limit take a few days, not 8 to 10 weeks.

There is gron [1], which prints json as a series of assignment statements that recreate the json value. It's pretty handy.

[1] https://github.com/TomNomNom/gron

I don't use either one, but just from reading the comments here: using treesitter for syntax highlighting and having LSP configured out of the box (for kakoune I think you need to install an extension called kak-lsp).

I think the generator from xkcd sounds pretty good. https://xkcd.com/936/

I guess that, as most things related to using software, it boils down to familiarity. You say you managed to figure out Word's rules for when text will inherit formatting of the text to the left of it and when it won't. I believe you, I imagine I would have learned them too if I kept using Word. On the other hand when I taught Linear Programming I typeset lots of optimization problems and didn't Google anything, because I already know plenty of LaTeX. I certainly have googled stuff for LaTeX and found it is a quick and painless way of figuring out how to do something. This seems like an advantage of LaTeX, not a disadvantage as you seem to think. What do you do in Word when you want to do something you don't how to do? Doesn't googling also work there? And if not, that seems like a disadvantage of Word.

I do things like that inside Emacs with the consult-grep command from the Consult package, combined with the Orderless matching style, Embark to collect the results in a buffer. This has several advantages over the command line:

- Interactivity: the results are updated live as you type, so you catch typos sooner and can tweak the search terms as you go.

- The buffer of search results you collect with Embark is not dead text like it would be in the terminal, instead, each line is a link to the corresponding file taking you to the line that matched.

- Wgrep lets you edit all the matching lines in place!

Packages referenced:

1. Consult: https://github.com/minad/consult/

2. Orderless: https://github.com/oantolin/orderless

3. Embark: https://github.com/oantolin/embark

4. Wgrep: http://github.com/mhayashi1120/Emacs-wgrep/raw/master/wgrep....

> Any tips

Put your phone in landscape orientation, pinch-zoom until the text takes up the entire width of the screen.

And Emacs already has a good Gemini and Gopher browser, called Elpher.

Maybe Word has come of age in terms of equation editing, but has it come to age in terms of usability? I haven't used in about 10 years, but back then it crashed a lot on larger documents, and I suffered a lot from never knowing if I was inside the invisible tags or not, so I never knew when I was typing right after a list if I would start a new list item or not, or when typing next to italic text if the new text would be italic or not. I also remember that trying to move anything, like an embedded image, would move tons of other things too. I definitely found LaTeX much easier to use.

And that's excluding Word line-breaking which always looked rather poor to me: some lines were left very empty and others overcrowded. It just didn't look professional to me. Perhaps that was been fixed too.

Oh, that's a strict criterion! So not even Vim cuts it for you, it has to be neovim.

> I have the same problem in the other direction, viper is not a substitute for neovim.

You should give Evil a try, people say it's much better than Viper. At the very least Evil emulates Vim, while Viper just emulates vi.

Renaming because of this name clash has been suggested but the suggestion wasn't taken up:

- https://github.com/asdf-vm/asdf/issues/383 - https://github.com/asdf-vm/asdf/issues/547

They did do something to ameliate this though: now they refer to the proect as asdf-vm as much as possible, to distinguish it from Common Lisp asdf.

Informative function signatures, allowing programmers to add per-function documentation, and tooling that displays those things are by no means limited to staticly typed languages.

I guess knowing allowed types for each parameter is informative (more if very specific types are used rather than string or integer), but documentation usually specifies that anyway. And even knowing all the types isn't usually enough without documentation.

My point is just that I've used plenty of libraries in dynamically typed languages without needing to read the source. And conversely, I've occasionally needed to look at the source of a function in a staticly typed language, to answer some question not answered by the types and documentation.

> I also think it's a great shame that the language isn't statically-typed, so to understand how to use something I have to inspect its source code.

I understand everything in that sentence except the word "so".

Are people that use the word "explainer" just unaware of the word "explanation"? Also, what do those people call someone who explains? "Explainerer"?