Hacker News

points by bluGill 1 day ago | 0 comments

> the population of people merely using Emacs and lightly hacking their own setup

This is a good thing. Custom environments should be either minimal or upstream. Anybody should be able to sit down next to you and help you hack out a change. The more unusual/custom your environment is the less productive that is, and this more than balances out any possible gain you can make from custom setups. (don't forget to account for your cost to learn elisp and then make the changes!)

Somebody needs to make the correct setups. However most of us have better things to do.

[–] TFNA 1 day ago

I'm not advocating for making all (or even most) users spend so much time on internals that they don't get productivity gains. Rather, I'm concerned about maintaining, ensuring generational turnover, and healthily boosting the elite that the product depends on. It is no secret that a number of Emacs ecosystem core devs are middle-aged, and so the project is a few heart attacks or whatever away from losing the experience and competence that has sustained it so well.

[–] skydhash 1 day ago

Most of emacs is lisp. The actual C part is quite small considering the capabilities of the system. Lisp being what it is, it’s moslty about domain knowledge than language expertise.

[–] jupitr 1 day ago

I feel the lisp constructed on top needs significant language expertise. Lispy constructs of defvar, defconst, defcustom, alist, cl-loop etc. are quite extensively used in emacs - and need an understanding quite unique to Lisp. Of course, the domain then builds on top of this shared understanding of the contructs themselves.

I would say that loss of expertise in emacs-lisp is a significant loss, even if there continues to exist C-expertise globally.

[–] skydhash 1 day ago

There's a wealth of packages and the documentation for emacs-lisp is quite extensive. It's not some esoteric language. But what I'm talking about is that the code for the packages can be quite simple and readable.

[–] samus 1 day ago

It's just a Lisp dialect at the end of the day and not much more complicated to learn than Javascript. The only unusual aspect is its prevalent use of dynamic scoping, although nowadays lexical scoping is also available and encouraged AFAIK.

[–] brabel 1 day ago

emacs 31+ started emiting this warning for my custom Lisp files:

Warning (files): Missing ‘lexical-binding’ cookie in "~/.emacs.d/custom.el". You can add one with ‘M-x elisp-enable-lexical-binding RET’. See ‘(elisp)Selecting Lisp Dialect’ and ‘(elisp)Converting to Lexical Binding’ for more information.

I am still trying to figure out what to do! The manual is quite verbose and I haven't had the patience to go through it yet.

[–] Jtsummers 1 day ago

If you open the file and execute:

  M-x elisp-enable-lexical-binding RET

It will add a cookie (lexical-binding) to the top of the file. If you want to do it manually put this:

  ;; -*- lexical-binding: nil; -*-

or this:

  ;; -*- lexical-binding: t; -*-

at the top of your custom.el file. They want it to be explicit now because eventually lexical will be the default. If you put in the former then when lexical becomes the default, the file will still use the current dynamic bindings. And if you use the latter, if there are issues you'll discover them now before the default changes and you're surprised by it.

[–] jibalt 1 day ago

It told you exactly what to do.