| ▲ | royal__ 13 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Can you explain more what's wrong with the Neovim ecosystem? I just switched from Doom Emacs to Neovim and my impression of Neovim has been much better. (I get that Emacs has a much more powerful backbone, I just realized that I didn't really need that power; I just want a good text editor) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | iLemming 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
> what's wrong with the Neovim ecosystem Nothing's wrong with it. It's just incomparable categorically. Just like you can't really equate a photo-editor and the web-browser. Sure, there's a way to do photo editing in the browser, still will be weird to compare them. > Neovim has been much better In what sense? Emacs is a Lisp interpreter with a text editor embedded in it - one can fully emulate Neovim features in it, the opposite is hardly possible - you can bolt Lisp interpreter on top of Neovim, but it won't be the same. > I just want a good text editor Is that implying Emacs doesn't have "a good one"? You probably just have not discovered some mind-blowing features of the editor. It is hands down the best-known machine ever designed to deal with plain text, nothing even comes close. Indirect buffers alone are such a brilliant idea, I have zero clue how people ever exposed to that power would willingly abandon it. I get it though, building a text-manipulating theater orchestrated by Lisp is not for everyone. Unfortunately, most newcomers get attracted to Emacs hearing "how powerful an editor it is", without ever learning what exactly makes it as such. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | aktau 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
I think Neovim itself has been stabilizing quite a bit in terms of upgrade breakage. A common reason for breakage is/was:
But:
The latest example of #1 is vim.pack, which is a plugin manager similar to vim-plug, mini.deps (vim.pack is based on mini.deps), lazy et cetera.I can remember removing vim-commentary (from tpope) a while ago because Neovim included something like it in the main distribution. Granted, that specific plugin never broke because it uses the stable viml API. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | lycopodiopsida 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
I think a big difference is that in the end emacs often makes a call and adopts one of the very popular packages to the core - eglot, modus-themes, use-package - there are certainly more, and more will come. It may not make everyone happy, but is sets the baseline - e.g., I am using eglot as package manager, but I wrap it into use-package commands for compatibility reasons. No such thing exist in neovim (or at least in times when I was using it), so that churn never ends. Also I find, that neovim ecosystem is concentrated on one (very productive) developer in an unhealthy manner - folke often takes time off and half the packages one uses stands still. But in the end, while I like neovim, I also find that emacs ecosystem has better ideas - which-key, embark do not stop to amuse me (I will not comment on whether it is a good thing for a text editor). I also do not like lua and actively dislike the experience of debugging and configuring neovim with it (maybe less of an issue with LLM these days). In my experience, running in a terminal absolutely adds a bunch of rendering/performance issues and all kind of surprising failures with hotkeys. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | rjzzleep 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
LSPs keep getting reimplemented, package managers keep getting reimplemented. It's a bit like the react version of text editors. I used it more than I use emacs, but I agree with the assessment of doom emacs vs neovim. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | sph 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Neovim suffers from the Javascript kids mode of development. Constant change, constant churn, the mirage of stability always behind the corner, you always require third-party packages for functionality that should be core, completely erasing the Lindy effect of vim proper. It’s a bit sad Neovim has stolen the thunder from the original work of Moolenaar & co. My guess is that neovim will splinter itself down the line further again once lua stops being attractive, while vim & Emacs will keep chugging along for another half century. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||