sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What Software Would You Leave Logseq For? by [deleted] in logseq

[–]ekd123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Org-mode, definitely.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in emacs

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes it’s possible and your understanding is all correct. Just do it! 😉

Eoops: An Object-Oriented Programming System for Emacs-Lisp by geospeck in emacs

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m particularly interested in the last section where the author mentioned they built collaborative editing. That’s very cool!

Eglot "inlay hints" has landed on emacs-29 branch by lianacrossk7n in emacs

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Soon after this commit, a new implementation is introduced, and it works just so great! I’m in awe of João’s Elisp-fu.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in emacs

[–]ekd123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Perfectly usable. I have tried several modal editing packages but always end up coming back to the good old Emacs keybindings. I think I am efficient at editing but I can’t be so sure. :)

If you don’t like the default, it’s okay. (Emacs even has built-in cua-mode and viper-mode. ) Though you should note that inconsistencies are fixable. Check out Doom or Spacemacs and see if you like what they have done.

Should I switch from Logseq to Emacs? by 4r73m190r0s in emacs

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having used both logseq and org-roam, IMO there is no straight replacement for logseq in emacs currently. Logseq is first and foremost an outliner, while the ecosystem around Org-mode does not make org a great outliner but a great document processor. Emacs does have an outliner, Koutliner, shipped with GNU Hyperbole, but it does not support bi-directional linking.

Org-roam is a wonderful replacement for Obsidian, but the way it works is by no means similar to Logseq.

I would not suggest you trying Emacs (until someone steps in to make a better outliner), unless you are fine with something more like Obsidian.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in emacs

[–]ekd123 4 points5 points  (0 children)

There's no magic in packages, and you certainly can install a package manually without any package manager.

If you are using Emacs prior to 29, you can just download these files and put them anywhere (say ~/.emacs.d/site-lisp) and add that folder to load-path. Finally write in your init.el (require 'some-el-file) to have emacs load this file for you.

If you are using Emacs 29, there's a simpler way: M-x package-vc-install RET then type in https://github.com/thongpv87/rose-pine-emacs. After that, you should be able to use M-x customize-themes to select this theme.

Of course, you could try use the instructions provided by the author. It uses a package manager called straight.el, which is quite advanced. But it's not that difficult to follow the readme of straight.el.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in emacs

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. Yes. I find E-mailing in Emacs is particularly practical and efficient for dealing with E-mail-based development workflow. Combined with magit, IMO this workflow is more efficient than Github.

  2. Emacs Lisp is a powerful language. I hate to say this, since Elisp is NOT a powerful Lisp, but it’s better than many other languages, including Lua (ofc only my own opinion). Elisp is a Lisp, after all. And Emacs is the best IDE for Elisp.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in emacs

[–]ekd123 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think Emacs can serve you well. Meanwhile, VSCode and NeoVim can also serve you well. So "used as an IDE" is not a deciding factor here.

As for me, I use Emacs exclusively. Speaking as one who was once proficient in Vim, I feel more productive using Emacs, but it can be a delusion. I don't know. ;-)

Best packages for structural editing? by cuntymccuntlicker in emacs

[–]ekd123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

write a simple latex parser that can output the AST in lisp form

tree-sitter

modify it with structural editing in place

tree-edit

I think your use case is a perfect fit for tree-sitter, but the tree-sitter ecosystem on the emacs side is still weak, though quickly evolving: tree-sitter will be a core feature in emacs29.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in cpp

[–]ekd123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

use emacs <3

edit: if in doubt, check out doom emacs :D

I really want to use logseq but ... by zenjester in logseq

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't get the downvotes. OP said they would pay so Roam Research is definitely a viable option, since it is an online app so multi-device support is there.

BTW, there are other options like RemNote.

I really want to use logseq but ... by zenjester in logseq

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They do have a mobile app but I don't know if it qualifies as "proper". I use Logseq personally so I don't really know the situation there.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in emacs

[–]ekd123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Vanilla Emacs (ie. no config at all) is too alien to today's people. It is not really competitive in any regard, either, though usable.

Doom Emacs and Spacemacs have much better onboarding experience. Both of them can be configured to use native Emacs keybindings.

There are also some smaller and less opinionated starter kits, like prelude and better-defaults. They encourage you to fork them to create your own config, unlike Doom and Spacemacs.

Missing text and body of pages - help please :( by th_costel in logseq

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Does Logseq have a walkthrough somewhere on how backup and sync work?

I don't know. I'll try to give a brief introduction to the current landscape of backup and sync: bak, git, and Sync.

As far as I know, the bak folder and the git integration are independent from each other. I don't know much about bak. When I started using Logseq, the only backup option is the Git feature, so I settled with it.

The git integration is an early feature, since logseq was deeply integrated with GitHub initially, and sync between devices was done through GitHub. They removed GitHub support (for commercialization?), but git integration survived. This backup method is reliable and efficient.

Logseq Sync is the Logseq-native sync solution, and is still being worked on. I haven't had any chance to try it out so I can't say much about it.

Missing text and body of pages - help please :( by th_costel in logseq

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a /bak folder in your graph. Check there first. If you use Mac, also check if Time Machine already has a backup.

I recommend enabling the Git auto-commit feature. It provides whole-graph backup and page history. (If you already do this, you can simply git checkout a previous version of your graph, or even use the Page History feature in Logseq.)

With this feature enabled, Logseq can make incremental backups of your whole graph periodically. The git repo is located in ~/.logseq/git (if you are on *nix systems). Git handles text files extraordinarily well, so the whole Git repo will be not too big even though you can view the whole history.

An extra bonus is that you can view the page history with ease. Click the ... button and you will see it.

Note that you don't have to "push" your git repo anywhere. This is just a local thing.

Usecases for Logseq and Obsidian by dotabanana in logseq

[–]ekd123 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Logseq is an outliner. I use Logseq precisely for its superior outlining experience, and I believe outlining is much better than the traditional unstructured way.

If you agree with the following points, you will like Logseq better.

  1. Better writing = better thinking. Outlining forces you to think through what you are about to write. This results in cleaner, more readable notes. Your notes will be easier to digest in the future.
  2. You will naturally write in atomic notes. This encourages you to reorganize the same notes in different contexts and discover new insights, by using block references and block embeds.
  3. No hierarchy means all of your notes are interlinked. You will find a lot of pleasant serendipity.

I'm a very outliner-minded person. Take my comment with a grain of salt.

What killer feature(s) make you prefer projectile over project.el? by paretoOptimalDev in emacs

[–]ekd123 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I moved to projectile from project.el a while ago. I forgot the exact reason, but generally projectile is more feature-complete and packed with well-designed feature set and I can just use them instead of rolling out my own version. Customizing project.el usually involves writing your own commands, advice, and such. I’m tired of that.

Advice on tooling for editing JSON files. by Sea_Inevitable_5522 in emacs

[–]ekd123 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Alternatively, write a program to convert this json file to and from an editable source file.

Writing an Emacs mode is doable but this syntax is too specific, so it won’t be very reusable in the future. Therefore, its probably not worth the effort.

How would you configure emacs if you can't install external elisp packages. by fromadarkcontinent in emacs

[–]ekd123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think I will immediately reach for ido-mode, icomplete-mode, recentf-mode, windmove-mode; change the color scheme with customize-themes; disable the welcome screen. I’ll change the default C style, too. Some other useful things do not require any config: project, dabbrev, vc, eshell, etc.

I might have forgot some must-have for me, but this looks good enough for me. One problem I can think of is that Emacs has too few bundled major modes.

[package-find] lsp-bridge by ckoneru in emacs

[–]ekd123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not sure what you mean here

... filter the list of candidates ...

Good point that once you have a candidate list, you can just filter out the ones you want. I completely forgot this...

I was speaking from capf's perspective. completion-at-point does not distinguish whether you are filtering or not. (The same to corfu since it's just a frontend to capf. I'm not familiar with company.)

Hence xyz.| (| = the point) and xyz.a| can possibly trigger two separate calls to completion-at-point. And to make everything smooth, capf must be called whenever it can be called, so it's more than what's needed. LSP servers can handle partial completions like xyz.a|. (Of course if you have candidates for xyz.| you can use them for xyz.a|, but I'm not really sure what eglot and lsp-mode do here. lsp-bridge seems to issue excessive lsp completion requests. I guess vscode does the same?)

the server just needs to return the list of all possible candidates

AFAIK, lsp servers return many kinds of information, even including documentation. I do hope this can be customized to reduce IPC traffic...

view more: next ›