Hacker News Reader

Comment by spain | Hacker News Reader

How about an embedded Lisp interpreter?

I have come to favour the Acme[1] approach of having a virtual file system to interact with the editor, so that you can write compatible scripts in any language!

[1] http://research.swtch.com/acme

That sounds like a mighty good idea to me. Not a fan of the Acme interface, but the idea of exposing the editor API through the filesystem means that there is no war like Emacs Lisp vs Scheme in the Emacs world (an no people suggesting that we should switch to JavaScript): people will write plugins in any language they damn please, and they can even follow trends (Go this year, Rust next year, and OCaml from 2017 forth).

IIRC neovim exposes it via a socket which allows similar behavior.

At one point, REPL first editors (ipython notebooks, etc) will meet edition based IDE (them) in an essential cosmic spark and nothing will ever be the same ever again.

Isn't that LightTable? I think they discovered actually everything would remain largely the same.

Good point, how could I forgot LT...

IntelliJ sort of has this for Scala. Scala Worksheets. They are more useful than a REPL, but not quite to iPython in terms of features (mainly because they aren't browser based). But they also have some advantages over iPython (like integrating many of the IDE features).

Yeah everybody is approaching the solution from their angle, I just wondered if there was a center.

PyCharm now offers the ability to open iPython notebooks inside itself - which gives you the nice IDE goodies, plus the notebook goodies.

The downside of course is that Python is very dynamic - so IDEs are of relatively limited use.

The downside of course is that Python is very dynamic - so IDEs are of relatively limited use.

I am surprised to hear you say that with "PyCharm" being the first word in your comment. We have had very good experiences with PyCharm + reStructuredText annotations to help it when the return type or arg type is not inferable. Just like its IJ friend, PyCharm has caught quite a few bugs and helps the team edit Python and not text.

PyCharm's usage is not optional on my team; we tried the "use whatever text editor you want" approach and it turns out that people are not as good at memorizing the type signatures of a complicated codebase as computers are.

Sort of a lisp 1.5 with scheme style syntax. They could opt in within the rc file to allow users not interested to ignore it. Would be closer to the original vi then.

That's probably not in line with the suckless way.

I curious their philosophy (less is more?). I used dwm for a bit and still use a personally hacked inspired from dwm console derived dvtm, also by Marc iirc. If their going towards UNIX philosophy concepts it will be nice to hack a post config to extend it with personal my schemes and nda|dfa regex engines. This looks like a nice project. Looking forward to watching it.

They actually have a philosophy page which explains it: http://suckless.org/philosophy

It basically boils down to minimalism (in general) with an emphasis on minimalist code instead of minimalist UX/UI (whenever the two conflict).

Well, there is a vim mode for emacs.

I grew up with the one which didn't have the letter 'm' in it. The lisp/scheme concept could be seen as an alternative to vim/script for embedding/extending where the opt-in was meant for posix ex/regex programmers as an alternative to non vi modality with recursive expression via either McCarthy or Kleene closures and styles of programming with or without /term(cap|info)/ databases.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com