The single best thing I like about Zed is how they unironically put up a video on their homepage where they take a perfectly fine function, and butcher it with irrelevant features using CoPilot, and in the process:
- Make the function’s name not match what it is actually doing.
- Hardcode three special cases for no good reason.
- Write no tests at all.
- Update the documentation, but make the short version of it misleading, suggesting it accepts all named colors, rather than just three. (The long description clarifies that, so it’s not completely bad.)
- Show how engineering the prompt to do what they want takes more time than just writing the code in the first place.
And that’s supposed to be a feature. I wonder how they’d feel if someone sent them a pull request done in a similar manner, resulting in similarly bad code.
I think I’ll remain firmly in the “if FPS is an important metric in your editor, you’re doing something wrong” camp, and will also steer clear of anything that hypes up the plagiarism parrots as something that’d be a net win.
If FPS is NOT an important metric in text editing, you are doing something wrong. Otherwise, good points.
Unless FPS means “files per second”, I don’t see why it would, past the point of usability. You can only type so quickly, and 50 frames is as meaningful as 144.
If you get to that point where frames per second does matter, you’re either the fastest typist known to mankind, or it might be worth finding a more efficient way of doing what you’re doing.
In many modern environments the second I start scrolling my eyes start to bleed. Yes, I want 60 fps min. That was the first part. The second part is about stability. 20 fps may be enough for typing, but it needs to be 20 fps all the time. Not the average between 1 and 60, it is makes IDEs unusable.
No need to update my screen when nothing happens. I use neovim, the pinnacle of editing.
Sucks for consumers but that is poetic justice for the zed team. They now atone for their sin of creating electron.
Out of the loop here, what sucks for the zed team?
Probably the reason Vs Code has so many extensions, is that they can easily (low barrier of entry) be created in JavaScript. This is mainly due to the fact that VS Code is an electron application, itself written in JavaScript.
It sucks for zed, because these extensions allow users to customize their workflows to their needs which decreases their liklihood to switch to a different editer. I think the message of the post is that VS Code’s large and mature extension ecosystem will somewhat impede users migrating to zed.
The irony in this is that the people behind zed and atom were the ones who initially created electron for atom.
Church of Emacs vs. Cult of vi is the only true rivalry. Enlightenment will only be found taking one of these paths.
As an old coder this is the only religious war worth having. 😂
(Totally church of vi btw)
I’m an old emacs warrior, tired of the war. I’m Church of Emacs, but why? I don’t know what I don’t know about the advantages of vi/vim, I only know that when I see other coders use them, they seem to weave the magic about as well as I do.
I know that I have a ton of built-up configuration code that makes emacs the perfect editor for me. I know that I can’t imagine using git much without magit, or how I would organize anything without org-mode, or how I could tolerate the frustration of editing in a container on a remote server without tramp. I know that I have a huge familiarity bias.
I know that whenever I see anybody with with any of these flashy new-fangled editors, they spend most of their time futzing around with dials and buttons and other gadgets, and thinking about how cool it all is, rather than thinking about the code. They start projects really quickly, they handle some refactoring edge cases slightly faster, but they take forever to do any real work, and are completely unprepared to do anything with a new language or text structure at all.
I say: Vim and Emacs against the world.
I hope that I live long enough to one day master either vim or emacs. Until then Unix is my IDE, and mind you, Sublime my editor. But I could immediately relate to people being distracted by their tools rather than focusing on their code. That’s what I have observed a lot, it’s a distraction from what matters most. Even code itself could be a distraction from more essential code. That’s why I think, programmer should delete code constantly, until there is less code, or preferably no code.
I recently learned there are people that think emacs and vi are bloated. They like acme or sam or something. Iceberg is so deep.
Ed users have not found the internet yet, otherwise they’d be in the war too
When you think of a bloated text editor, you would not expect VI to be that. If anything, it’s closer to the opposite.
Check this out. It puts everything I thought that was, you know, more ethical to use to the harmful section and suggests some unknown and probably not very useful today stuff. Can someone explain if they have good points or not?
Unclear. They don’t give their reasoning beyond “complicated = bad”, and very specifically leave it up to the imagination of the reader.
While they make some interesting points with regards to overcomplication and scope creep, there are also good reasons why we’re still not using programs like
edas text editors, such as it being arcane and unintuitive.viwill at least helpfully point out:exit is not an editor command. Instead,edwill not-so-helpfully point out?.
