bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

[Raj Divecha via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1057 bytes --]

Hi, I am an occasional Emacs user. I know that Emacs is a very capable editor. In fact, most modern editors provide similar features, just that the learning curve for them is close to nothing. They simply work out of the box. Thus, I am wondering, why not Emacs? How difficult would it be to provide a different interface, a simpler one yet fully capable? For example, while I can use Emacs for simple text editing, I still can't use it as my developer IDE. I want some feature that will help me easily install a project explorer like extension. The project explorer could help create workspaces, project, help me navigate them with ease etc. Think MS's VS Code. On the same lines, I would like a LaTeX window with its own extensions. Emacs already supports all this but the learning curve is so steep that I don't feel like opening it anymore! Thus wondering why can't Emacs come out with a simpler interface (and allow one to switch to an advance interface when needed) and throw the learning curve out the window? -OR- Am I missing something? Thanks, Raj

[-- Attachment #2.1: Type: text/html, Size: 1243 bytes --]

bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

[Stefan Kangas]

tags 74488 + notabug
close 74488
thanks

Raj Divecha via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text
editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi, I am an occasional Emacs user. I know that Emacs is a very capable
> editor. In fact, most modern editors provide similar features, just
> that the learning curve for them is close to nothing. They simply work
> out of the box. Thus, I am wondering, why not Emacs? How difficult
> would it be to provide a different interface, a simpler one yet fully
> capable? For example, while I can use Emacs for simple text editing, I
> still can't use it as my developer IDE. I want some feature that will
> help me easily install a project explorer like extension. The project
> explorer could help create workspaces, project, help me navigate them
> with ease etc. Think MS's VS Code. On the same lines, I would like a
> LaTeX window with its own extensions. Emacs already supports all this
> but the learning curve is so steep that I don't feel like opening it
> anymore! Thus wondering why can't Emacs come out with a simpler
> interface (and allow one to switch to an advance interface when
> needed) and throw the learning curve out the window? -OR- Am I missing
> something? Thanks, Raj

Thanks for sharing your ideas about how to improve Emacs.

We always aim for at least feature parity with typical IDEs, and in many
cases we actually have a much stronger set of features than they do.
But it is true that the Emacs interface is fundamentally different from
that of VSCode.  It's challenging to provide a different user interface
along the lines that you suggest, while also providing all the features
that we do.

However, this bug list is not really appropriate or intended for very
wide-ranging discussions about what Emacs could look like in the future.
It is intended for much more focused discussions about specific and
reproducible bugs in Emacs, and narrowly scoped feature requests.  For
that reason, I will close this bug report now.

I believe you might have more success discussing these and other similar
ideas in forums such as the Emacs Reddit page or on IRC.  Thanks.

bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

severity 74488 wishlist
thanks

> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 23:27:09 +0000 (UTC)
> From:  Raj Divecha via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> 
> Hi, I am an occasional Emacs user. I know that Emacs is a very capable editor. In fact, most modern editors provide similar features, just that the learning curve for them is close to nothing. They simply work out of the box. Thus, I am wondering, why not Emacs? How difficult would it be to provide a different interface, a simpler one yet fully capable? For example, while I can use Emacs for simple text editing, I still can't use it as my developer IDE. I want some feature that will help me easily install a project explorer like extension. The project explorer could help create workspaces, project, help me navigate them with ease etc. Think MS's VS Code. On the same lines, I would like a LaTeX window with its own extensions. Emacs already supports all this but the learning curve is so steep that I don't feel like opening it anymore! Thus wondering why can't Emacs come out with a simpler interface (and allow one to switch to an advance interface when needed) and throw the learning curve out the window? -OR- Am I missing something? Thanks, Raj

The simple answer to your questions is "because no one has yet
proposed code changes to implement those features."

Emacs is developed by a loosely-coupled group of volunteers, each one
of whom contributes changes in the areas that are of interest to
him/her and match their domains of expertise.  We acknowledge the need
and the advantages of having the advanced IDE-related features work
out of the box, but have no way of assigning someone to the job of
actually doing that non-trivial job.  It is non-trivial because
different users of Emacs have different interests and needs (e.g.,
develop in vastly different programming languages), and setting up the
tools we have to fit the needs of a particular user is a complex task.
In addition, unlike VS Code, we don't want to promote non-free servers
and services, so it is much more difficult for us to provide OOTB
configuration for features that rely on external programs and servers.

But if and when someone comes with code that does one of these jobs,
we embrace that very quickly.  Examples include Tree-Sitter based
major modes, LSP support via Eglot, etc.  Thus, volunteers are welcome
to contribute additional features that will make Emacs a better IDE,
and ease the learning curve for newcomers.

Thank you for your interest in Emacs.

bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > However, this bug list is not really appropriate or intended for very
  > wide-ranging discussions about what Emacs could look like in the future.
  > It is intended for much more focused discussions about specific and
  > reproducible bugs in Emacs, and narrowly scoped feature requests.

We do have a list for feature discussions: emacs-devel@gnu.org.
that is the place to bring up ideas for features.


-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

[Raj Divecha via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3365 bytes --]

I wish I could contribute but unfortunately I am stuck with my bread & butter job. I am a seasoned systems engineer and mostly work on C/C++/Python, validating features of various ICs that my company manufactures and I know if I want I can work on this non-trivial change but at the end of the day my bread & butter job takes priority over everything else. Just out of curiosity, what will it take to get this done? Is there a document I can review and get a feel for the amount of work? And approximately, how many engineers do you think are needed to work on this and the different expertise required? LISP is kind of dead and the users might need Python to customize their interface, thus, I believe both LISP and Python will have to be supported simultaneously. On Nov 22, 2024, at 11:59 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote: severity 74488 wishlist thanks Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 23:27:09 +0000 (UTC) From: Raj Divecha via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> Hi, I am an occasional Emacs user. I know that Emacs is a very capable editor. In fact, most modern editors provide similar features, just that the learning curve for them is close to nothing. They simply work out of the box. Thus, I am wondering, why not Emacs? How difficult would it be to provide a different interface, a simpler one yet fully capable? For example, while I can use Emacs for simple text editing, I still can't use it as my developer IDE. I want some feature that will help me easily install a project explorer like extension. The project explorer could help create workspaces, project, help me navigate them with ease etc. Think MS's VS Code. On the same lines, I would like a LaTeX window with its own extensions. Emacs already supports all this but the learning curve is so steep that I don't feel like opening it anymore! Thus wondering why can't Emacs come out with a simpler interface (and allow one to switch to an advance interface when needed) and throw the learning curve out the window? -OR- Am I missing something? Thanks, Raj The simple answer to your questions is "because no one has yet proposed code changes to implement those features." Emacs is developed by a loosely-coupled group of volunteers, each one of whom contributes changes in the areas that are of interest to him/her and match their domains of expertise. We acknowledge the need and the advantages of having the advanced IDE-related features work out of the box, but have no way of assigning someone to the job of actually doing that non-trivial job. It is non-trivial because different users of Emacs have different interests and needs (e.g., develop in vastly different programming languages), and setting up the tools we have to fit the needs of a particular user is a complex task. In addition, unlike VS Code, we don't want to promote non-free servers and services, so it is much more difficult for us to provide OOTB configuration for features that rely on external programs and servers. But if and when someone comes with code that does one of these jobs, we embrace that very quickly. Examples include Tree-Sitter based major modes, LSP support via Eglot, etc. Thus, volunteers are welcome to contribute additional features that will make Emacs a better IDE, and ease the learning curve for newcomers. Thank you for your interest in Emacs.

[-- Attachment #2.1: Type: text/html, Size: 4151 bytes --]

bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Cc: 74488@debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Raj Divecha <rjd1977tech@icloud.com>
> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 17:58:44 +0000 (UTC)
> 
> I wish I could contribute but unfortunately I am stuck with my bread
> & butter job. I am a seasoned systems engineer and mostly work on
> C/C++/Python, validating features of various ICs that my company
> manufactures and I know if I want I can work on this non-trivial
> change but at the end of the day my bread & butter job takes
> priority over everything else. Just out of curiosity, what will it
> take to get this done? Is there a document I can review and get a
> feel for the amount of work? And approximately, how many engineers
> do you think are needed to work on this and the different expertise
> required?

That depends on what is the scope of the work.  This is not a single
monolith job that cannot be subdivided into smaller ones.  So the
first step towards answering your questions is to identify those
smaller parts and steps, and then prioritize them.  When that is
done, we could try estimating the effort required for the most
important parts.

> LISP is kind of dead and the users might need Python to
> customize their interface, thus, I believe both LISP and Python will
> have to be supported simultaneously.

That just makes the bar higher, IMO.  It is easy to extend Emacs by
writing Lisp programs; doing that in Python is currently impossible,
and will need a non-trivial development of the required
infrastructure.

bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

[Eduardo Ochs]

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 at 14:59, Raj Divecha via Bug reports for GNU
Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
wrote:
>
> I wish I could contribute but unfortunately I am stuck with my bread
> & butter job. I am a seasoned systems engineer and mostly work on
> C/C++/Python, validating features of various ICs that my company
> manufactures and I know if I want I can work on this non-trivial
> change but at the end of the day my bread & butter job takes
> priority over everything else.
>
> Just out of curiosity, what will it take to get this done? Is there
> a document I can review and get a feel for the amount of work? And
> approximately, how many engineers do you think are needed to work on
> this and the different expertise required? LISP is kind of dead and
> the users might need Python to customize their interface, thus, I
> believe both LISP and Python will have to be supported
> simultaneously.

Hi Raj,

have you read this thread?

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2024-10/msg00018.html
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2024-10/threads.html#00018

  Cheers,
    Eduardo Ochs

bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

[Raj Divecha via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2082 bytes --]

Hi Eduardo, I probably never came across that thread. But yeah, that person seems to be echoing my frustration. I could probably watch David Wilson's videos but I chose to read the Emacs docs and following the instruction in there and use the extensions recommended in there.. I went that route but was hitting road blocks after road block. I would have got through every tiny detail if I had the time but ultimately I had to give up! Although, I might soon try to do it again or follow David Wilson. But the point is why not just make a user friendly interface? How can a new comer like VS Code come and grab the market and a powerful tool like Emacs can't? I wish I had started with Emacs as my first editor. That way I would have been able to stick with it for life! Transitioning from one tool/editor to another is also frustrating and that's why I wish I should have started with Emacs. Thanks, Raj On Nov 26, 2024, at 2:58 PM, Eduardo Ochs <eduardoochs@gmail.com> wrote: On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 at 14:59, Raj Divecha via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> wrote: I wish I could contribute but unfortunately I am stuck with my bread & butter job. I am a seasoned systems engineer and mostly work on C/C++/Python, validating features of various ICs that my company manufactures and I know if I want I can work on this non-trivial change but at the end of the day my bread & butter job takes priority over everything else. Just out of curiosity, what will it take to get this done? Is there a document I can review and get a feel for the amount of work? And approximately, how many engineers do you think are needed to work on this and the different expertise required? LISP is kind of dead and the users might need Python to customize their interface, thus, I believe both LISP and Python will have to be supported simultaneously. Hi Raj, have you read this thread? https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2024-10/msg00018.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2024-10/threads.html#00018 Cheers, Eduardo Ochs

[-- Attachment #2.1: Type: text/html, Size: 3063 bytes --]

bug#74488: Why not modernize Emacs

[Eduardo Ochs]

On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 19:42, Raj Divecha <rjd1977tech@icloud.com> wrote:
>
> But the point is why not just make a user friendly interface? How
> can a new comer like VS Code come and grab the market and a powerful
> tool like Emacs can't?

Hi Raj,

Most people who write Emacs extensions do that in their spare time,
and for fun - and writing for a target audience of users who know the
basics of Lisp is much more fun that writing for users who don't know
Lisp, who don't like Lisp, and who want an editor that is like
VSCode...

  Cheers =(,
    Eduardo Ochs
    http://anggtwu.net/eev-intros/find-elisp-intro.html

--
They tried to fool a Black population
By telling them Lisp-Lisp dead
And I knows Lisp no dead