Here's a summary of the themes from the Hacker News discussion:
Emacs Modal Editing Landscape and Evolution
The discussion revolves around various approaches to modal editing within Emacs, highlighting a general trend of experimentation to move beyond the limitations of traditional modal editors like Vim. Users are exploring new models inspired by editors like Kakoune and Helix, aiming for more efficient and fluid text manipulation.
- "It's really cool to see this and other recent experimentation towards breaking past the local maximum of modal editing we've been in since Vi. Really neat stuff!" - smlavine
- "Meow aims to blend modal editing into Emacs with minimal interference with its original key-bindings" - eviks
Meow: A Prominent Modal Editing Package
Meow is frequently mentioned as a significant player in Emacs modal editing, often discussed in comparison to Vim's Evil mode and Kakoune's editing model. While praised for its robustness and flexibility, some users have encountered issues or found it not to their liking, leading to the development of alternatives.
- "I gave Meow a fair shake a year or so ago. I'd say it's currently the most robust mode for implementing Kakoune or Helix-like bindings in Emacs, but you can customize it to be like vim or anything else. It's more lightweight than evil-mode." - jasperry
- "It's one of the best designed packages I've seen. Except 'repeat' that was horribly broken last time I checked but can be fixed by using the repeat-fu package. Manages to cleanly implement the kakoune model in an incredibly flexible manner and without interfering with anything else." - lvass
- "Had a similar experience, tried to switch to Meow twice, it's really nice in most ways. But I found lack of vim-style repeat and accidental 'dropping' the selection to be so unwieldy that I couldn't stick to using it." - ideasman42
- "I still have my meow config, but currently disabled." - lvass
God Mode's Niche and Functionality
God Mode is presented as another modal editing option within Emacs, with users pointing out its specific strengths and use cases, particularly for navigation and read-only buffers, though some find it falls into disuse as Emacs' inherent editing model is preferred.
- "The god-mode minor mode that is linked is also mind-boggling: https://github.com/emacsorphanage/god-mode" - smlavine
- "I have god-mode installed, but I've basically forgot about it as Emacs have a different model of editing than Vim." - skydhash
- "god-mode is my modal editing of choice. I usually use it to scroll and read through and select files. It works especially well with read-only buffers in my experience." - Karrot_Kream
The "Blacksmithing" vs. "Piano Playing" Metaphor for Editing
A recurring theme is the fundamental difference in the feel and approach to editing between Emacs and Vim. Vim is often described as a “language of editing” or "playing the piano," emphasizing composition and a sequence of actions. Emacs, in contrast, is likened to "blacksmithing," where users select and apply tools to shape text, suggesting a more direct and less compositional approach.
- "With Vim, text editing feels like playing the piano. For every action, you compose a sequence of bindings and execute on it. It is really a language of editing." - skydhash
- "Emacs feels more like blacksmithing, hammering the text into a proper shape. There's no composition, you just select the correct tools and applies it. And emacs have a lot of those tools." - skydhash
The Philosophy of "No Modal Editing"
Several users express a preference for Emacs' built-in, non-modal editing paradigm, often augmented by specialized packages. This approach is favored for its simplicity, the avoidance of mode switching, and the seamless integration of powerful navigation and text manipulation tools.
- "What works best for me is no modal editing at all. Definitely requires the most keystrokes, but that's not a limiting factor for me. It just feels nice never having to think about modes or constantly pressing Esc, and instead navigating with a mixture of default Emacs keybinds and great, joyous to use packages like Avy, smartparens, tempel and combobulate." - lvass
- "I used vim for 8 years and after switching to Emacs, realized that I'm the same. I was spending way more time (in vim) thinking about (to borrow another commenter's metaphor) how I was going to play the notes than what notes I was going to write." - acdw
- "Is there someone who's gone from Emacs style to modal editing who could sell the idea to me? I just don't see the point, personally." - globular-toast
- "As soon as I disabled the awful GUI stuff my love affair started. It all just made complete sense. Key 'chords' just work for my brain. I must know hundreds of them without really trying. And Emacs's version of a 'mode', as in major modes and minor modes, is just perfect (I think other editors like VS Code have copied this aspect)." - globular-toast
The Depth of Vim/Evil Mode Integration and Muscle Memory
A contrasting viewpoint is that for long-time Vim users, the modal editing model, particularly through Emacs' Evil mode, has become deeply ingrained. This muscle memory allows for near-instantaneous execution of complex editing commands, where the process feels natural and requires little conscious thought.
- "funny, 20 years of vim/evil here and I feel like I never really think about the motions anymore, except maybe when building a macro" - dingnuts
- "I’m in the same boat. I’ve internalized Vim keybindings so much that there’s no friction between thinking and doing on the screen. If I want to place the cursor on the next line, move to the end and add a semicolon, then jump to the end of the file, I just do it. My pet theory is that because Vim keybindings are unintuitive, developing proficiency required building muscle memory, which offloads cognitive load from my brain to my fingers so text editing becomes mechanical rather than cognitive." - 8s2ngy
Personal Preference and the Subjectivity of Editing Styles ("De gustibus non est disputandum")
A significant theme is the recognition that individual preferences for editing styles are highly personal. What one user finds intuitive and efficient, another might find cumbersome. There's an acknowledgment that different users value different aspects of text editing, and there isn't a single "best" way.
- "De gustibus non est disputandum. If you think modal, you value mode switching because it aligns with your thinking. I use both kinds and have done since the late 70s. It's fine to disagree btw, there are many editors, these ones are mine." - ggm
Advanced and Nuanced Text Manipulation with Meow
Despite some users moving away from it, Meow is also appreciated for enabling more sophisticated text manipulation actions that go beyond basic modes. These actions, such as operating on specific text selections (e.g., "current string," "until start of scope"), are seen as powerful enhancements compared to previous Emacs-based solutions.
- "I still edit with chords in insert mode but meow enables me to take actions on a variety of subjects more easily (current string, until start of scope, until the next 2 -, next 5 words)." - green7ea
- "I had a few packages to do similar things before (expand-region) but none of them clicked like meow did." - green7ea
The Kakoune Model's Appeal for Keystroke Efficiency
The Kakoune editing model is specifically highlighted for its potential to achieve text editing with the fewest keystrokes. While its "motion-as-selection" concept is praised for exhaustiveness, some users find the Vim model's "operator pending mode" more intuitive for subsequent actions.
- "The kakoune model is definitely what you're looking for if your desire is to edit text with the fewest keystrokes, it's far better than vim. I think the vim model is better, though, because motion-as-selection is fundamentally exhaustive, and in vim, by the time you realize what you're going to do, you go into operator pending mode (e.g. pressing d) and the next keystroke also feels obvious, while in meow you may have to reset the selection by doing some movement." - lvass