Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone(limetext.org)
limetext.org
Lime Text: Open Source Sublime Text clone
http://limetext.org/
250 comments
> I wish they wouldn't attach themselves to the sublime brand
They aren't claiming to be associated with Sublime - they're saying that they're trying to make something _like_ Sublime. And that is actually a pretty good way to explain it. When I first found LimeText (about a year ago) I was searching for an "open source ST2 clone". I already knew that I wanted something like Sublime, I just wanted it to be open source so I could contribute to it. Having to compare the features of LimeText to the ubiquitous features of Sublime would have just made it harder for me to "get" what LimeText is.
> because he has the gall to charge $60
I don't think that the 60USD was a big deal. I was fine with that, I just wanted something that's open-source.
> weird that the fact that it's made in Go is part of the pitch
I think that the reason why is because LimeText is marketed towards people who want to contribute to their editor. Sublime is probably a more stable solution for people looking for something like Sublime, so right now the big feature is that it's open-source.
* Also, I should note that I've never used LimeText... I ended up switching to Atom instead. My primary experience with it is just finding it and evaluating it as an alternative to Sublime.
They aren't claiming to be associated with Sublime - they're saying that they're trying to make something _like_ Sublime. And that is actually a pretty good way to explain it. When I first found LimeText (about a year ago) I was searching for an "open source ST2 clone". I already knew that I wanted something like Sublime, I just wanted it to be open source so I could contribute to it. Having to compare the features of LimeText to the ubiquitous features of Sublime would have just made it harder for me to "get" what LimeText is.
> because he has the gall to charge $60
I don't think that the 60USD was a big deal. I was fine with that, I just wanted something that's open-source.
> weird that the fact that it's made in Go is part of the pitch
I think that the reason why is because LimeText is marketed towards people who want to contribute to their editor. Sublime is probably a more stable solution for people looking for something like Sublime, so right now the big feature is that it's open-source.
* Also, I should note that I've never used LimeText... I ended up switching to Atom instead. My primary experience with it is just finding it and evaluating it as an alternative to Sublime.
Sub-LimeText
They use wordplay on the sublime editor to name themselves.
It's up to trademark lawyers to prove if the name is associated with Sublime Text or not.
They use wordplay on the sublime editor to name themselves.
It's up to trademark lawyers to prove if the name is associated with Sublime Text or not.
I agree, but the main reason for most people (I can't comment on the author's intention) is that Sublime is lacking updates and transparency about the development.
They did announced something recently, like getting ready for ST 4. And 3 is not even a major upgrade from ST2, IMHO.
They did announced something recently, like getting ready for ST 4. And 3 is not even a major upgrade from ST2, IMHO.
> And 3 is not even a major upgrade from ST2, IMHO.
From a development standpoint it likely was. Doing a plug-in rewrite is a ton of work.
From a development standpoint it likely was. Doing a plug-in rewrite is a ton of work.
Yea, I'm still using v2.0 because I don't want to get burned again. He released v3 a few months after I bought it.
I understand software development isn't cheap but it's kind of annoying that $60 doesn't include free upgrades.
I understand software development isn't cheap but it's kind of annoying that $60 doesn't include free upgrades.
I think it does include free updates. At least, I just copied my code from v2 into v3 and that worked.
Expiration Date
Licenses purchased for Sublime Text 3 do not expire, however
an upgrade fee will be required for Sublime Text 4.
What the hell? Sublime Text 3 isn't even out of beta, nor featured on the Sublime Text homepage.
This isn't a "fork" though or at least it doesn't look like it from a cursory look at their website. So they shouldn't be riding the coat tails of sublime at all. I understand a fork doing that but not this.
I guess it depends, at least for me, on how much it looks and feels like Sublime Text and whether it is compatible with the numerous addons there are.
I've been using Sublime Text 2 for a few years now. I'm not sure what a major upgrade would entail when it works so well already. Do Emacs and Vim get 'major upgrades'? [actual question]
no, but emacs and vim don't charge 60 bucks per version. I'm not saying this is necessarily negative for ST, but its the point he was making. I frankly think 60 bucks is worth robust support which ST certainly did not have.
Anyways, theres no satisfying HN. When Atom came out, the consensus was that they should've come out and said it was an ST clone upfront. Now someone does that and it seems the tide has changed.
While we're on Atom, since switching I've found its everything ST should've been. Its open source and has a huge community developing very useful plugins (not to mention, they're well integrated from a usability perspective - git/terminal status/linter/etc). Also, I have yet to run into a serious bug/versioning issue which ST plugins were rife with before I dropped it.
Anyways, theres no satisfying HN. When Atom came out, the consensus was that they should've come out and said it was an ST clone upfront. Now someone does that and it seems the tide has changed.
While we're on Atom, since switching I've found its everything ST should've been. Its open source and has a huge community developing very useful plugins (not to mention, they're well integrated from a usability perspective - git/terminal status/linter/etc). Also, I have yet to run into a serious bug/versioning issue which ST plugins were rife with before I dropped it.
I don't think Atom is ready to replace Sublime yet for me. The way it renders text just bugs me for one. The other thing is that it's lacking a good way to do syntax specific settings like in Sublime. Aside from that it's a matter of the plugin ecosystem not being as mature.
>> no, but emacs and vim don't charge 60 bucks per version
Not that it matters much, but it's actually $70 now: http://www.sublimetext.com/buy
Not that it matters much, but it's actually $70 now: http://www.sublimetext.com/buy
> Do Emacs and Vim get 'major upgrades'?
Yeah, they do. It's very hard to do in both cases, for different reasons - licensing for Emacs, code quality/style for Vim - but it happens. For Emacs just read this: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Ant... and this: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Ant... (or look at normal changelog, but I kind of like this "backwards in time" format, it's fun :)) to get a feeling for what you'd miss by not doing a "major upgrade".
Yeah, they do. It's very hard to do in both cases, for different reasons - licensing for Emacs, code quality/style for Vim - but it happens. For Emacs just read this: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Ant... and this: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Ant... (or look at normal changelog, but I kind of like this "backwards in time" format, it's fun :)) to get a feeling for what you'd miss by not doing a "major upgrade".
As long as Sublime doesn't go the Jetbrains way where they never reach a stable status, but they keep increasing the version number every year, I'm fine.
I don't think people care so much about how it's 60$. At work that makes little difference to me. The big thing is how this is open source.
> The big thing is how this is open source.
And how does that make a difference? You could already contribute plugins to both to add/remove/alter functionality, so other than a warm fuzzy feeling, what does Open Source add to your productivity?
And how does that make a difference? You could already contribute plugins to both to add/remove/alter functionality, so other than a warm fuzzy feeling, what does Open Source add to your productivity?
If something breaks or development stalls or he wants new features and the developer has abandoned the project he can then pick it up himself if he wants.
I'm sure that if he were to abandon Sublime, then he'd open source it. The community is too big not to. Besides, $60 is not a bad price for something that will always be ahead of Lime's curve.
$0 is not a bad price for something that will always be behind of Sublime's curve.
I used closed and open source software. It just feels much better if I see a bug, fix it, place a pull request and be done with it, than discuss with some devs in a bug tracker if and when they want to fix a bug I hate.
I used closed and open source software. It just feels much better if I see a bug, fix it, place a pull request and be done with it, than discuss with some devs in a bug tracker if and when they want to fix a bug I hate.
And that's the problem. Every single open source software looks like it was cobbled together with no vision or coherency in design.
It's no surprise that most open source software is clunky and hard to use whereas closed products always have that visual polish.
It's no surprise that most open source software is clunky and hard to use whereas closed products always have that visual polish.
Yes, many projects lack a style guide for UI and/or coding.
And often big projects have, similar to closed source software, rather ugly workflows where you have to discuss stuff before you're assigned to a bug and then have to send it patches and what not.
A good review process is important or else everything ends in chaos.
And often big projects have, similar to closed source software, rather ugly workflows where you have to discuss stuff before you're assigned to a bug and then have to send it patches and what not.
A good review process is important or else everything ends in chaos.
Closed products always have that visual polish
Every single? You sure you want to make that claim on HN?
Yeah, take the go language, for instance. No vision, cobbled together by amateurs without any clear goals, and no real-world experience. Awful. /s
A lot of open/free projects are indeed "hobby" projects (and not in a good way) -- but to claim that all of them are bad? Compared to what? The shareware scene from the 90s?
A lot of open/free projects are indeed "hobby" projects (and not in a good way) -- but to claim that all of them are bad? Compared to what? The shareware scene from the 90s?
> Every single open source software looks like it was cobbled together with no vision or coherency in design.
Creating a Pull Request doesn't mean that the developer of the open source project has to accept it verbatim if it doesn't fit with the 'vision.'
[Also, I'm pretty sure that the parent to your post was talking about bugs that probably don't involve visuals.]
Creating a Pull Request doesn't mean that the developer of the open source project has to accept it verbatim if it doesn't fit with the 'vision.'
[Also, I'm pretty sure that the parent to your post was talking about bugs that probably don't involve visuals.]
> for something that will always be ahead of Lime's curve.
What makes you so sure of that?
What makes you so sure of that?
In my experience, when a project starts out of the gate by riding on the success of another project, it never fully catches up. To me, it means the maintainers are not capable of creating something themselves that is their own. They will likely always rely on Sublime to come up with new features and ideas first, and then copy them.
That wasn't what they said. They said:
> At work that makes little difference to me.
Clearly implying that Open Source is a productivity increase. I am asking why.
I'd put what you're saying in the "warm fuzzy feeling" department as in the real world the majority of developers, even if Sublime Text died, would just sit by patiently and wait for someone else to release a replacement. Most lack the skills, time, or both to develop a project like Sublime Text.
> At work that makes little difference to me.
Clearly implying that Open Source is a productivity increase. I am asking why.
I'd put what you're saying in the "warm fuzzy feeling" department as in the real world the majority of developers, even if Sublime Text died, would just sit by patiently and wait for someone else to release a replacement. Most lack the skills, time, or both to develop a project like Sublime Text.
> Clearly implying that Open Source is a productivity increase. I am asking why.
If something breaks or development stalls or he wants new features and the developer has abandoned the project he can then pick it up himself if he wants.
If something breaks or development stalls or he wants new features and the developer has abandoned the project he can then pick it up himself if he wants.
You just repeated what the person said above who I replied to. Repeating something doesn't add clarity and is not conducive to a conversation.
[deleted]
I read it as "At work, I'm happy to pay for software." and "I prefer to use open source software." as two separate thoughts.
That said, I agree that just because people can contribute to software doesn't mean they will. I'm certainly guilty of just living with bugs or functionality gaps in open source software that I use, lazily waiting for someone else to address it the same way I would if it were something developed privately.
That said, I agree that just because people can contribute to software doesn't mean they will. I'm certainly guilty of just living with bugs or functionality gaps in open source software that I use, lazily waiting for someone else to address it the same way I would if it were something developed privately.
You can contribute plugins, sure, but the direction of the entire project is in the hands of one person. As others have said, updates have become more scarce in recent times. For example, it was almost 6 months between build Build 3061 and Build 3062.
Open Source doesn't imply that there's a productivity gain. For obvious reasons I'm a lot more comfortable using OS tools at work.
Open Source doesn't imply that there's a productivity gain. For obvious reasons I'm a lot more comfortable using OS tools at work.
I don't know how much it being open-source will help though. The open-source world is chock full of libraries and tools that have been abandoned long ago, despite having numerous contributors listed on the project. I'd say that about 30-40% of Rails gems I come across everyday have not been updated in a year if not more. Sure, they have forks, but unlike the original gem, they are not mature enough to be used in a production environment.
Can I ask a really silly question? Why do updates matter unless there are either serious bugs or glaring missing features? If a tool is relatively bug-free and has a plugin ecosystem which handles added functionality, why does the state of the core program matter all that much?
The real issue is that of nomenclature. If you are a professional software developer (ST target audience) then you are careful about how you use a #1 development tool that calls itself "unstable". It implies certain things about whether it is a good idea to install on a mission-critical server for example, or whether it is a good idea to invest time in writing plugins against its API.
The product itself may be relatively bug-free, but that is not really the issue. RHEL7Beta was relatively bug-free, but I would not advise you to use it for most purposes.
The product itself may be relatively bug-free, but that is not really the issue. RHEL7Beta was relatively bug-free, but I would not advise you to use it for most purposes.
I'm stuck using RHEL5 and it would be nice if I could run sublime text. If it were open source, I could probably build it against RHEL5 libraries. The official binaries don't support my platform.
Oddly enough, I've been using ST2 for a while and have been too lazy to actually buy a license for it (or Divvy).
I think I'll do so now for exactly this reason.
I think I'll do so now for exactly this reason.
I can't because still after all these years the only payment option is still Paypal. Trying to buy a serious development tool here I'm not shopping on grandma's home sewn teddy bears and scarves.
It's ridiculous in my strong opinion.
This is like someone trying to get me to buy a domain on Godaddy just because I like to use Heroku for hosting. I don't use Paypal.
It's ridiculous in my strong opinion.
This is like someone trying to get me to buy a domain on Godaddy just because I like to use Heroku for hosting. I don't use Paypal.
From the second section of the Sales FAQ [0]:
Alternative Payment Methods PayPal is currently the only way to purchase a license for Sublime Text. However, for most countries a PayPal account is not required; you can purchase as a guest using a credit card. Unfortunately, PayPal requires users in some countries, such as New Zealand, to create an account.
[0] http://www.sublimetext.com/sales_faq
Alternative Payment Methods PayPal is currently the only way to purchase a license for Sublime Text. However, for most countries a PayPal account is not required; you can purchase as a guest using a credit card. Unfortunately, PayPal requires users in some countries, such as New Zealand, to create an account.
[0] http://www.sublimetext.com/sales_faq
> I wish they wouldn't attach themselves to the sublime brand. It's not theirs
Its competition. Thats the market segment they are aiming to attract and serve. They aren't claiming to be Sublime Text, they are claiming they want to be better than it. Its the market leader in that area, and if that is the segment they are interested in serving, imho it wouldn't make sense to not compare themselves to Sublime Text.
> Also, I think it's weird that the fact that it's made in Go is part of the pitch. I mean, unless I'm contributing... I don't care.
Play the other side. You're interested in an open source alternative to Sublime Text, and you love working in Go. Is it relevant now? Because I'm willing to bet by its open source nature, they are as interested in attracting committers as they are users at this point.
Its competition. Thats the market segment they are aiming to attract and serve. They aren't claiming to be Sublime Text, they are claiming they want to be better than it. Its the market leader in that area, and if that is the segment they are interested in serving, imho it wouldn't make sense to not compare themselves to Sublime Text.
> Also, I think it's weird that the fact that it's made in Go is part of the pitch. I mean, unless I'm contributing... I don't care.
Play the other side. You're interested in an open source alternative to Sublime Text, and you love working in Go. Is it relevant now? Because I'm willing to bet by its open source nature, they are as interested in attracting committers as they are users at this point.
> They aren't claiming to be Sublime Text, they are claiming they want to be better than it
Sure, but, they're using sublime text's brand to draw attention to their own project. If they called themselves, say, "Cherry edit" and just had a comparison matrix to sublime text without saying "we want to be sublime", I bet this wouldn't have made it to the front page. They're piggybacking off the other projects success by invoking its name and lineage, while positioning themselves as a competitor by undercutting the price (in this case: free).
That's what I mean. It's not illegal or whatever, it just feels like poor sportsmanship.
Sure, but, they're using sublime text's brand to draw attention to their own project. If they called themselves, say, "Cherry edit" and just had a comparison matrix to sublime text without saying "we want to be sublime", I bet this wouldn't have made it to the front page. They're piggybacking off the other projects success by invoking its name and lineage, while positioning themselves as a competitor by undercutting the price (in this case: free).
That's what I mean. It's not illegal or whatever, it just feels like poor sportsmanship.
> They aren't claiming to be Sublime Text
Pretty close, calling your project Lime text is pretty sketchy IMHO.
> it wouldn't make sense to not compare themselves to Sublime Text
But they aren't comparing themselves, that would be a feature page showing how many features they have. Instead they are branding themselves in a very similar way.
Pretty close, calling your project Lime text is pretty sketchy IMHO.
> it wouldn't make sense to not compare themselves to Sublime Text
But they aren't comparing themselves, that would be a feature page showing how many features they have. Instead they are branding themselves in a very similar way.
I see your point of the not liking "sublime-but-free". But isn't that what basically everyone does with "it's like uber meets airb&b for x"?
I think it would be fair to say that it was inspired by sublime, I agree completely with your sentiment. It does seem that Sublime will end up open sourced most likely, unless author is willing to continue development with same intensity he did before.
As for price, I was happy to pay for the editor, even though I use vim most of the time, I am happy to support modern editors and use them.
As for price, I was happy to pay for the editor, even though I use vim most of the time, I am happy to support modern editors and use them.
Go is part of the pitch because the project is still is its relatively early stages (I believe it's about a year old). It's just as important for them to attract developers as it is users.
You've got to hand it to them for the clever name. They manage to imply that it's better than Sublime while using fewer letters.
If there is one app I've always been thrilled to pay for, it's Sublime Text. I've purchased and renewed the licence ever since v1 came out. While it may not be open sourced, you can see it was created with a lot of love for code and openness. Today there are thousands of amazing plugins to enhance it. And though I fully respect the open source initiative, I, for once, am very happy to support / give some money to a peer developer who has made our world much better.
I completely agree with what you say. Sublime is awesome and I don't mind paying money for closed-source software. What I do mind is, that the development seems to have stopped, and being closed-source nobody can move it forward but the original maintainer.
It once again brings attention to the most important "bus factor" [0]
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_factor
It once again brings attention to the most important "bus factor" [0]
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_factor
I'm pretty curious about what new features you are looking for in Sublime. I spend more time in Sublime Text than pretty much any other application.
I understand the idea that "development may have stopped", but there are not any glaring bugs, sublime text 3 is super fast, and there is a huge community building sublime plugins.
The editor was built in such a way where it allows the entire community to keep moving it forward even if the original developer has moved onto other things, and I happen to think that is great.
I'm not sure that editors like vi and emacs receive regular updates. It seems that emacs releases can have up to 2 years between versions, and I can't find the last time that vi was updated. Those do have the advantage of being open sourced, but unless there are glaring holes in Sublime then I don't see this as a big problem.
Besides all that it DOES look as though there are plans for the future of Sublime as someone mentioned in a forum post on here. If it is true that development has been focused on improving the payment system for purchasing Sublime then I am all for that.
I understand the idea that "development may have stopped", but there are not any glaring bugs, sublime text 3 is super fast, and there is a huge community building sublime plugins.
The editor was built in such a way where it allows the entire community to keep moving it forward even if the original developer has moved onto other things, and I happen to think that is great.
I'm not sure that editors like vi and emacs receive regular updates. It seems that emacs releases can have up to 2 years between versions, and I can't find the last time that vi was updated. Those do have the advantage of being open sourced, but unless there are glaring holes in Sublime then I don't see this as a big problem.
Besides all that it DOES look as though there are plans for the future of Sublime as someone mentioned in a forum post on here. If it is true that development has been focused on improving the payment system for purchasing Sublime then I am all for that.
Both Emacs and Vim are updated regularly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Emacs#Release_history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vim_%28text_editor%29#Release_h...
In between major releases they have tons and tons of bug fixes (Vim probably has hundreds per release).
Editors can suffer a lot from code rot since they have to integrate with a lot of things. An Open Source version could be quite interesting from Sublime's community point of view. I don't know about the developer's income while this happens, though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Emacs#Release_history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vim_%28text_editor%29#Release_h...
In between major releases they have tons and tons of bug fixes (Vim probably has hundreds per release).
Editors can suffer a lot from code rot since they have to integrate with a lot of things. An Open Source version could be quite interesting from Sublime's community point of view. I don't know about the developer's income while this happens, though.
Looking at the links you posted - vim is updated once every 3-4 years, emacs - once a year. Looking at sublime text release log (http://www.sublimetext.com/blog/) it's been updated much more often than emacs and vim combined.
> Looking at the links you posted - vim is updated once every 3-4 years, emacs - once a year. Looking at sublime text release log (http://www.sublimetext.com/blog/) it's been updated much more often than emacs and vim combined.
Honestly though. Emacs was first released almost half a century ago. Its core is fairly feature-complete. It doesn't need intense development and constant releases.
Besides, at least for Emacs, one of the main driving principles is for it to have a good & stable core, and have all the bells and whistles delivered via extensions and packages. And those extensions gets updated continuously. Often from git commit to git commit, depending on author.
When you have decades worth of customizations and ecosystem-code to consider, keeping the core stable is the only strategy you can possibly choose.
Your comparison isn't apples to oranges, it's 40 years old whisky to diet coke.
Edit: Half a century, not decade. Thanks dragonwriter.
Honestly though. Emacs was first released almost half a century ago. Its core is fairly feature-complete. It doesn't need intense development and constant releases.
Besides, at least for Emacs, one of the main driving principles is for it to have a good & stable core, and have all the bells and whistles delivered via extensions and packages. And those extensions gets updated continuously. Often from git commit to git commit, depending on author.
When you have decades worth of customizations and ecosystem-code to consider, keeping the core stable is the only strategy you can possibly choose.
Your comparison isn't apples to oranges, it's 40 years old whisky to diet coke.
Edit: Half a century, not decade. Thanks dragonwriter.
> Emacs was first release almost half a decade ago.
Closer to half a century, which I guess reinforces your point.
Closer to half a century, which I guess reinforces your point.
It's the difference between updated and released. The last Emacs commit was this morning around 9:30am. There is ongoing development on both editors.
Really the most work you'll be interested in as a user will be the plugin side. You the ST community doing good work, or you have the army of github and then some always working on vim plugins. I know who I'm going with :P
While it is nice that they're both updated regularly, I'm not sure that hundreds of bug fixes per release is actually comforting. (I say this as a happy Vim user :)
Considering the humongous amount of corner cases Vim covers and the huge base of knowledgeable users that push Vim to its limits, I'd say that the bug count is to be expected.
Sublime is sorely lacking when it comes to working on multiple projects.
I regularly have 15+ projects open, all of which I work on regularly, and I probably have 30+ projects that I work on regularly that I don't bother to keep open, simply because the window menu grows too long. I use the next/previous window commands to cycle, but sometimes I have so many projects open I have to use the window menu, which coincidentally seems to be randomly ordered, so it takes a long time, relatively speaking, to scan.
There is no way to quickly switch between per-window projects. I tried to write a plugin for this (giving you a cmd-P-style project switcher), but it turns out the API doesn't support switching windows; you can find a window, but focusing it doesn't do anything if it's not the current window (something I consider a bug, but the developer never responded to my bug report). You can't create new windows, either.
Some other things:
* Sublime is fast, but it could easily be faster. Large files are quite slow to open, even in ST3.
* The sidebar needs work. SidebarEnhancements is great, but not enough. There's no Git integration, for one. No mode flags. Renaming and moving files is cumbersome. No multiple selection.
* The global file search functionality is pretty bad. It opens up a new buffer, but it appends to the current one if there is one. You can only double-click on the match, not on the context lines. My wish list item is for the search results to be a live view into the matching files, so that I can actually edit within the results buffer.
* Package Control needs to be moved into the editor and become a first-class citizen. It's weird that it has to be added manually.
* Syntax highlighting per file-pattern, not extension. For example, .js.erb is an ERB template containing JavaScript, but there is no way to tell Sublime this; syntaxes can only be associated with the last extension.
* Lots of tiny things. For example, Sublime doesn't have a built-in way to filter a selection through a Unix command (eg., "sort"). Turns out process management in a plugin is awkward.
I could probably think of a bunch more.
I regularly have 15+ projects open, all of which I work on regularly, and I probably have 30+ projects that I work on regularly that I don't bother to keep open, simply because the window menu grows too long. I use the next/previous window commands to cycle, but sometimes I have so many projects open I have to use the window menu, which coincidentally seems to be randomly ordered, so it takes a long time, relatively speaking, to scan.
There is no way to quickly switch between per-window projects. I tried to write a plugin for this (giving you a cmd-P-style project switcher), but it turns out the API doesn't support switching windows; you can find a window, but focusing it doesn't do anything if it's not the current window (something I consider a bug, but the developer never responded to my bug report). You can't create new windows, either.
Some other things:
* Sublime is fast, but it could easily be faster. Large files are quite slow to open, even in ST3.
* The sidebar needs work. SidebarEnhancements is great, but not enough. There's no Git integration, for one. No mode flags. Renaming and moving files is cumbersome. No multiple selection.
* The global file search functionality is pretty bad. It opens up a new buffer, but it appends to the current one if there is one. You can only double-click on the match, not on the context lines. My wish list item is for the search results to be a live view into the matching files, so that I can actually edit within the results buffer.
* Package Control needs to be moved into the editor and become a first-class citizen. It's weird that it has to be added manually.
* Syntax highlighting per file-pattern, not extension. For example, .js.erb is an ERB template containing JavaScript, but there is no way to tell Sublime this; syntaxes can only be associated with the last extension.
* Lots of tiny things. For example, Sublime doesn't have a built-in way to filter a selection through a Unix command (eg., "sort"). Turns out process management in a plugin is awkward.
I could probably think of a bunch more.
Maybe I can address a few of your concerns.
> My wish list item is for the search results to be a live view into the matching files, so that I can actually edit within the results buffer.
There's a plugin[1] for that btw, but I'm not certain it's completely safe for use. Last time I checked you could only modify the search results once.
>Syntax highlighting per file-pattern, not extension.
Luckily, there's a plugin[2] for that too.
>Turns out process management in a plugin is awkward.
I've never had a problem with that. Are you new to Python?
[1]: https://sublime.wbond.net/packages/FindResultsApplyChanges [2]: https://sublime.wbond.net/packages/ApplySyntax
> My wish list item is for the search results to be a live view into the matching files, so that I can actually edit within the results buffer.
There's a plugin[1] for that btw, but I'm not certain it's completely safe for use. Last time I checked you could only modify the search results once.
>Syntax highlighting per file-pattern, not extension.
Luckily, there's a plugin[2] for that too.
>Turns out process management in a plugin is awkward.
I've never had a problem with that. Are you new to Python?
[1]: https://sublime.wbond.net/packages/FindResultsApplyChanges [2]: https://sublime.wbond.net/packages/ApplySyntax
Thanks for telling me about ApplySyntax. So that solves one problem. But that search plugin is not "live". It lets you edit and apply (once, apparently).
I'm not at all new to Python. Forking processes is simple enough, the problem is about how Sublime manages the plugin thread; you have to jump through hoops with sublime.set_timeout() etc. At the time, I was having huge issues waiting for a process and then afterwards interacting with the editor; it seemed buggy. I'm sure it's possible given enough trial and error.
I'm not at all new to Python. Forking processes is simple enough, the problem is about how Sublime manages the plugin thread; you have to jump through hoops with sublime.set_timeout() etc. At the time, I was having huge issues waiting for a process and then afterwards interacting with the editor; it seemed buggy. I'm sure it's possible given enough trial and error.
The funny thing being that the impetus for a lot of people moving to Sublime in the first place was that happening to TextMate 1.
I'm pretty happy with TextMate 2 at this point - pretty regular updates, mature eco system, continuous improvement and its open source.
The TM2 phenomenon is something weird. TM had a huge traction when it was payware. Then it stalled, then it went open-source and everybody started looking for a new payware solution.
Apparently some people, still believe the theory that all you need to know about a product is on the price tag, which is absolutely false (e.g. emacs/vim have no price but are exceptional programmig editors, hardly matched by payware solutions).
Anyway, it's good to have choices.
Apparently some people, still believe the theory that all you need to know about a product is on the price tag, which is absolutely false (e.g. emacs/vim have no price but are exceptional programmig editors, hardly matched by payware solutions).
Anyway, it's good to have choices.
By my memory, the looking-for-an-alternative phase began long before the surprise open-sourcing.
I switched to Sublime because it was far faster and had the killer feature of offering a consistent UI between Linux, MacOS X, and Windows.
> TM had a huge traction when it was payware. Then it stalled, then it went open-source and everybody started looking for a new payware solution.
IIRC -- and I was never a TM user but was following it from the outside -- search for a TM replacement started before the open-sourcing; once TM became popular, people started looking for a cross-platform equivalent (because even lots of people who are primarily OSX users don't do all their editing there) and as the perceptions was that development was stalling, an even more people were searching for alternatives. The open-sourcing was sometime after that.
I don't think ST has been adopted because it is payware (that is, I don't think a significant force in its adoption is a preference for paid over free software), I think its been widely adopted because its features well match what a lot of people are looking for in an editor, and they are willing to pay for it.
IIRC -- and I was never a TM user but was following it from the outside -- search for a TM replacement started before the open-sourcing; once TM became popular, people started looking for a cross-platform equivalent (because even lots of people who are primarily OSX users don't do all their editing there) and as the perceptions was that development was stalling, an even more people were searching for alternatives. The open-sourcing was sometime after that.
I don't think ST has been adopted because it is payware (that is, I don't think a significant force in its adoption is a preference for paid over free software), I think its been widely adopted because its features well match what a lot of people are looking for in an editor, and they are willing to pay for it.
I don't think anyone saw the open source version coming. Development had totally halted for several years before that happened.
We need split window/panes and TM2 would be perfect for me.
Development has not stopped, there were some distractions to the developer. For the July 2014 status update, see http://www.sublimetext.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16517
While this is encouraging, I've heard it several times over the last year, and commits would speak louder than words in terms of commitment. Here is another post from March: https://www.sublimetext.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15477&...
If he doesn't want to/can't continue with development, he can always pull off what Blender did. Start a campaign to raise a certain amount of money and release source after raising it.
The author is very unresponsive (both to mails and on its own forum), progress is extremely slow, to the point that there are always many threads asking if the project is dead.
In these conditions, I don't mind seeing an open source project aiming to replace SublimeText.
There are already plenty of other alternatives out there. I think I've used every IDE under the sun in the past two years. From paid versions (ST2, Dreamweaver, WebStorm) and plenty of opens source options like Aptana and Notepad++.
The best alternative I've seen is Adobe Brackets (http://brackets.io/). This is Adobe's IDE that gets regular builds and is essentially the nightly build of their new Edge Code IDE (https://creative.adobe.com/products/code). The newest plugins come out on Brackets first, then make their way to Edge.
The best thing about Brackets is its built in HTML,JS and CSS so it opens up a huge development community for plugins.
Interesting that WebStorm is only $49.99 for a single license and $29.99 to renew versus ST2 is $70 for a single license and the upgrade cost I believe is $70 as well?
The best alternative I've seen is Adobe Brackets (http://brackets.io/). This is Adobe's IDE that gets regular builds and is essentially the nightly build of their new Edge Code IDE (https://creative.adobe.com/products/code). The newest plugins come out on Brackets first, then make their way to Edge.
The best thing about Brackets is its built in HTML,JS and CSS so it opens up a huge development community for plugins.
Interesting that WebStorm is only $49.99 for a single license and $29.99 to renew versus ST2 is $70 for a single license and the upgrade cost I believe is $70 as well?
I suppose being open source doesn't stop you from giving user licenses for money, though. True, people can just use your program by violating your license. From coder to coder that is way less likely than, for instance, between the movie industry and the movie viewers, though. And being open source, even the violating users might add value to your product by fixing bugs and adding features.
> I suppose being open source doesn't stop you from giving user licenses for money, though. True, people can just use your program by violating your license.
I don't follow your argument here. To qualify as "Open Source" rather than "source available", people have to be free to modify and redistribute the source code. So even if you charge for a license, there's nothing to stop the first licensee redistributing for free. In other words, if it's open source, people can use the program for free without violating your license.
I don't follow your argument here. To qualify as "Open Source" rather than "source available", people have to be free to modify and redistribute the source code. So even if you charge for a license, there's nothing to stop the first licensee redistributing for free. In other words, if it's open source, people can use the program for free without violating your license.
Yes this always got me about the, "free as in free speech, not as in free beer" argument. Ok, so technically it's only, "free as in free speech" but in practicality it's also, "free as in free beer".
But most people are not interested in the source code, they'd like to get a binary.
Seems to work for XChat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XChat#Shareware_controversy
Seems to work for XChat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XChat#Shareware_controversy
Except that, also for XChat, there will be people providing these binaries for free because the software is open source and they are not violating the license by redistribution for free.
I can give you my source code and allow you to change it, but if you want to execute a compiled result of that source code I can still ask you to pay me for it. And while there is no physical thing stopping you from executing the binary without my permission, I think you would still be unlikely to do so, if you know how much work I've put into it and you know that I would like you to give me a few bucks. I'd trust you that far even without knowing you. That's what I want to say.
You can do that, but it wouldn't be considered "open source" by most people, or by the OSI.
http://opensource.org/osd-annotated
> The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form.
...
> The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
...
> The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code.
And "physical things stopping you" from running/distributing software are pretty much irrelevant/nonexistent always, this is all about legal restrictions and licensing, not physical things.
http://opensource.org/osd-annotated
> The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form.
...
> The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
...
> The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code.
And "physical things stopping you" from running/distributing software are pretty much irrelevant/nonexistent always, this is all about legal restrictions and licensing, not physical things.
Your quotes say "distribution", not "except execution"
distribution in source code as well as compiled form. distribution of software _built from_.
Or you're saying it could be considered an open source license if it allowed people to distribute, but not run, executable binaries? Yeah, I don't think most people would consider that open source.
Or you're saying it could be considered an open source license if it allowed people to distribute, but not run, executable binaries? Yeah, I don't think most people would consider that open source.
"...but if you want to execute a compiled result of that source code I can still ask you to pay me for it."
When you buy a game on Steam, what kind of license do you buy? I think it's a license that allows you to play the game, i.e., use the binary. But I'm certainly not a lawyer.
Licenses are to my knowledge always part of copying, not of executing. That is: you may download a game to your computer, if you've got the permission. But Steam cannot tell you that you are only allowed to run the game on wednesdays.
I have not looked in over a year, but the Steam licenses used to be very careful about avoiding the word, "buy", altogether and instead used the word, "rent".
If you buy a cookbook, you don't need a separate license to execute the recipes.
[deleted](1)
There has been a few pieces of software distributed in this way over the years. I've always thought there might be something to it, as I myself would find it easier to pay for free software than for non-free.
It's quite popular in the Android space, where many publish source code on github but distribute free software binaries on Play Store for pay. Somehow it doesn't seem to have catched on for desktop software, although I suspect some of the pay-for-support free software is in fact organizations who aren't really interested in the support agreements per se.
It's quite popular in the Android space, where many publish source code on github but distribute free software binaries on Play Store for pay. Somehow it doesn't seem to have catched on for desktop software, although I suspect some of the pay-for-support free software is in fact organizations who aren't really interested in the support agreements per se.
> there are thousands of amazing plugins
It would be excellent if they were compatible with Lime...
It would be excellent if they were compatible with Lime...
60 bucks for an editor is quite expensive I think. There are nice alternative to such an editor.
I wonder what features makes sublime text so much valuable...
I wonder what features makes sublime text so much valuable...
60 bucks is less than an hour's pay for many developers. We're talking about a tool that gets used for > 8hrs/day in many cases. Other industries would DREAM of having tools this cheap!
* edited to remove the word "most" which seems to be upsetting some people.
* edited to remove the word "most" which seems to be upsetting some people.
Yes he might target developers who make an everyday use of it, I just use a C++ IDE. I still don't understand what are those features though. Isn't it just good for web/python development ?
No, I use it for C++ development as well as Python and Ruby and I think it's excellent. If I'm using something like Qt or Obj-C I use something with an IDE (mostly for the UI tools), but for everything else it's excellent.
> 60 bucks is less than an hour's pay for many/most developers
WHAT? Where?
WHAT? Where?
from the top of my head:
UK, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Netherlands, Germany, Austria, all of Scandinavia
UK, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Netherlands, Germany, Austria, all of Scandinavia
I don't make 60 bucks an hour (not even 45 euros)..
Much sad :(
Much sad :(
Same here. I'm a web developer in the US and I make $17 an hour... and that's at a major, international corporation. I think you and I are being shorted.
That's insane. I made more than that as an intern in college writing code. We paid our current interns more than that the last time I checked. I don't know what your background is, but get your LinkedIn profile polished and you should be getting multiple recruiter emails a week inviting you to interview. That's where the market is right now.
For reference, that's considerably less than the inflation-adjusted starting pay (roughly $22 USD now) at my first software job in 1996 doing QA work.
Big time, but it also depends on the area of the country you live in. Pay in the midwest is a lot lower for example, but the cost of living is a lot lower as well, whereas in Silicon Valley, it is not unheard of for people to make close to $100/hour (although that is somewhat rarer).
Even in the midwest, though, $17/hour (about $35,000/yr) is WAY low. Most devs in the midwest START at about 50,000 - 60,000 for entry-level.
$100/hr comes out to about $200k/yr. Only the developers at the top echelon make that kind of money.
You may be confusing your salary with what your boss charges clients. Or, it may simply be that you are from somewhere where the economy is different.
I know the distinction between the two ;-)
While my boss charges something like EUR100 an hour, I make less than 25% of that (after taxes).
O.t.o.h.: The salary is quite competitive around here (41k EUR a year, 40hrs/wk, 25 days off)
While my boss charges something like EUR100 an hour, I make less than 25% of that (after taxes).
O.t.o.h.: The salary is quite competitive around here (41k EUR a year, 40hrs/wk, 25 days off)
From your profile it looks like you're in The Netherlands. 41k/year is acceptable but not considered competitive in my book.
Edit: Note that this 41k/year pretax salary in The Netherlands does not include the contributions your employer makes for you to your social security/pension/disability insurance, etc. That being said, even after all those it's not yet near 60 bucks an hour.
Edit: Note that this 41k/year pretax salary in The Netherlands does not include the contributions your employer makes for you to your social security/pension/disability insurance, etc. That being said, even after all those it's not yet near 60 bucks an hour.
Exactly, I cost my employer approximately double of that. And you're right about it not being industry competitive; I should have been more specific about regionality (i.e. I choose to not work in Amsterdam where I can 'easily' make double but which will cost me around 2,5hrs of travel a day while I can walk to work in 5 minutes now).
Just a funny note, those values ($60 and 45 EUR) are almost exactly the same, to the .1. I don't know if you meant for that.
Yeah, it's the same...
https://www.google.nl/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&es...
https://www.google.nl/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&es...
In NYC, senior devs can charge 2x that. I assume silicon valley is the same way.
Which is $240k a year which puts you in the top 4% of earners nationwide. Why on earth you would pay a programmer $240k a year when you can probably get the same thing outsourced for $40k/year.
Because you can't reliably get the same thing outsourced for $40k/year.
Outsourced projects have a strong tendency to either completely go down in flames, or end up being rewritten (if you're smart about it) or "fixed" (if you're stupid about it and want to spend ten times as much) by the guys making $240k.
Outsourced projects have a strong tendency to either completely go down in flames, or end up being rewritten (if you're smart about it) or "fixed" (if you're stupid about it and want to spend ten times as much) by the guys making $240k.
[deleted]
I'll pay for value.
For instance, I've probably sunk $800 into my current editor over the years. It's been completely worth it, and I don't regret a single penny.
Another tool (for visual diffing) was about $300, 15 years or so ago. Totally worth it; it's paid for itself many times over.
In both cases the open source alternatives were awkward and borderline broken. Sure, I could have saved a few bucks by using them, or even spent some time improving them, but it's just not worth my time. I have other things to do.
Agreed that Sublime Text looks like abandonware now. It's a fine editor (not great), and the price seems okay, but I'm guessing there will be a mass exodus when ST 3.0 turns out to be not much better than previous versions.
For instance, I've probably sunk $800 into my current editor over the years. It's been completely worth it, and I don't regret a single penny.
Another tool (for visual diffing) was about $300, 15 years or so ago. Totally worth it; it's paid for itself many times over.
In both cases the open source alternatives were awkward and borderline broken. Sure, I could have saved a few bucks by using them, or even spent some time improving them, but it's just not worth my time. I have other things to do.
Agreed that Sublime Text looks like abandonware now. It's a fine editor (not great), and the price seems okay, but I'm guessing there will be a mass exodus when ST 3.0 turns out to be not much better than previous versions.
What editor?
Epsilon (it's an Emacs clone). Was about $300 new, and upgrades over the years were about $100 each.
It hasn't been updated in quite some time, but it's a very capable editor, and many of the heavies I've worked with in the past decade or so have also been power-users of it.
Epsilon is arguably more abandonware-like than Sublime Text, but it's also a much more mature product (with way better documentation). I'd love to have some new features (multi-window editing would be great, and multi-selections, and support for collapsing regions of text), but on the whole I'm happy with it.
It hasn't been updated in quite some time, but it's a very capable editor, and many of the heavies I've worked with in the past decade or so have also been power-users of it.
Epsilon is arguably more abandonware-like than Sublime Text, but it's also a much more mature product (with way better documentation). I'd love to have some new features (multi-window editing would be great, and multi-selections, and support for collapsing regions of text), but on the whole I'm happy with it.
Probably a JetBrains editor. One commercial license for IntelliJ IDEA is one buck shy of $500. If you include the cost of upgrades over the years, it's not that surprising.
What makes sublime text so valuable is that it saves me at least 30 minutes a day compared to what I used to use, not to mention making web development a much nicer experience.
So it more than pays for itself every 2 days, and makes working more enjoyable. I'd happily pay more than $60 for it.
So it more than pays for itself every 2 days, and makes working more enjoyable. I'd happily pay more than $60 for it.
>> 60 bucks for an editor is quite expensive I think.
I remember in the 90's, the big editors Visual SlickEdit and BBEdit were like $200 each!
I remember in the 90's, the big editors Visual SlickEdit and BBEdit were like $200 each!
Have you downloaded the "forever-free" trial?
Yes, I use that, but I'd also love to buy just for the sake of it. But 60 is a lot. I guess he just targets developer who are constantly using an editor instead, increasing the price and making that bet. The pop up message must be quite unnerving for heavy users.
Opensource is not about price. Its value is not in having $0 price. Never has been, never will be. How can people still be confused on this?
Also, you can and should support / give some money to open source developers as well.
Also, you can and should support / give some money to open source developers as well.
Me too. Even though I'm an die hard fan of the Emacs ideas on extensiblity (which is more similar to Github's Atom) speed and good defaults have to come first, the this Sublime has excelled.
Also being available everywhere. I like Text Mate quite a bit, but being single platform makes it harder to recommend.
> Also being available everywhere.
Emacs is everywhere. Windows. Linux. GUIed. And in a terminal where I've SSHed into a remote host.
TextMate? Nope. Sublime text? Nope. Atom? Nope. LightTable? No chance.
These modern GUI-only editors is IMO a major step back considering the Unix-y audience they are targeting: Any decent Unix-editor needs to work on my console. No exceptions.
Emacs is everywhere. Windows. Linux. GUIed. And in a terminal where I've SSHed into a remote host.
TextMate? Nope. Sublime text? Nope. Atom? Nope. LightTable? No chance.
These modern GUI-only editors is IMO a major step back considering the Unix-y audience they are targeting: Any decent Unix-editor needs to work on my console. No exceptions.
>Any decent Unix-editor needs to work on my console.
Not everyone feels that way. For example, I used Emacs in text mode for over 15 years, but now that I have tried editing text in a GUI, I do not ever want to go back.
Not everyone feels that way. For example, I used Emacs in text mode for over 15 years, but now that I have tried editing text in a GUI, I do not ever want to go back.
Not everyone feels that way, but enough people feel that way. I rarely use vi or emacs in a terminal these days, but I don't see a good reason to take the retrograde step back to a GUI-only editor.
Also, network access isn't equivalent to console-accessible for quite a few use cases--fixing networking on the target box for starters.
Also, network access isn't equivalent to console-accessible for quite a few use cases--fixing networking on the target box for starters.
And I don't see anyone teaching how you write an editor with multiple front-ends! People normally start with the front-end.
For many people, the opportunity costs of paperwork to get their employer to sign off and reimburse the purchase of a new tool exceeds the monetary costs of the tool. This is an oft under appreciated aspect of the free-as-in-beer distribution of Free-as-in-freedom software.
I used to pay for it, then it was nothing but crash for a while. Went to vim, forgot about it.
Great intentions, and huge shoes to fill. Already off on the right foot by going open source. Hope the authors have thick skin, this is one market that people are generally very particular about, and won't hold back on the details.
For me UI is almost as important as the engine. I'm a very clean/minimalist/organized person and if the software (or text editor in this case) does not, or cannot reflect that then there will be issues.
For me UI is almost as important as the engine. I'm a very clean/minimalist/organized person and if the software (or text editor in this case) does not, or cannot reflect that then there will be issues.
I don't like how it shamelessly piggybacks on Sublime's reputation by using its name left and right and doesn't hesitate to knock it down by calling itself a "successor". This comes across as disrespectful at least.
Sublime is dead. No one is actively developing it.
There's a rich history of piggybacking on dead software, and I (and many others) clicked this link because of that piggybacking.
I completely support and admire someone who is trying to further the development of Sublime without having the original code base.
There's a rich history of piggybacking on dead software, and I (and many others) clicked this link because of that piggybacking.
I completely support and admire someone who is trying to further the development of Sublime without having the original code base.
> Sublime is dead. No one is actively developing it.
This isn't correct, at least according to the author. This was posted in the ST forum on Mar. 18, 2014 [1]:
"From the Sublime office: We are not selling to Github, we are not stopping development of Sublime. As noted by another poster, this is effectively a one man band (I'm here to answer sales questions, process your refunds and get the mail so Jon doesn't have to). The past few months of silence on the development front have been a combination of boring back end work (taxes, new payment platform) as well as a break for the man driving this whole operation. No, we don't currently have a loud internet presence, which is can be an understandable cause for concern-something we intend to address once we move into the production version of 3. There is a vision for continued growth and development, there is momentum behind Sublime Text; it is not dead, just slow.
I'm happy to field any specific questions you might have about the Sublime's future: [email protected]."
[1]: https://www.sublimetext.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15477&...
This isn't correct, at least according to the author. This was posted in the ST forum on Mar. 18, 2014 [1]:
"From the Sublime office: We are not selling to Github, we are not stopping development of Sublime. As noted by another poster, this is effectively a one man band (I'm here to answer sales questions, process your refunds and get the mail so Jon doesn't have to). The past few months of silence on the development front have been a combination of boring back end work (taxes, new payment platform) as well as a break for the man driving this whole operation. No, we don't currently have a loud internet presence, which is can be an understandable cause for concern-something we intend to address once we move into the production version of 3. There is a vision for continued growth and development, there is momentum behind Sublime Text; it is not dead, just slow.
I'm happy to field any specific questions you might have about the Sublime's future: [email protected]."
[1]: https://www.sublimetext.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15477&...
>Sublime is dead. No one is actively developing it.
No one has to "actively develop it". It's a fully capable editor. It has a great plugin framework and ecosystem. Pending some incompatible OS change, I can use it for the next 30 years (using ST-3 from the early alphas, and it has been rock solid).
For comparison, I also use Vim, and it's not like I use any "new features" in Vim or anything. The most "current" features I use in it are like 10-15 years old.
No one has to "actively develop it". It's a fully capable editor. It has a great plugin framework and ecosystem. Pending some incompatible OS change, I can use it for the next 30 years (using ST-3 from the early alphas, and it has been rock solid).
For comparison, I also use Vim, and it's not like I use any "new features" in Vim or anything. The most "current" features I use in it are like 10-15 years old.
"No one has to "actively develop it". It's a fully capable editor."
People seem to forget this quite quickly, but what else is needed in ST3 right now? Very little in my day-to-day experience that isn't either solved via a plugin, or mostly trivial. I'd prefer a much more stable piece of software rather than one that's having upgrades thrown at it every month to maintain an 'actively developed' project status.
People seem to forget this quite quickly, but what else is needed in ST3 right now? Very little in my day-to-day experience that isn't either solved via a plugin, or mostly trivial. I'd prefer a much more stable piece of software rather than one that's having upgrades thrown at it every month to maintain an 'actively developed' project status.
I'm still using TextMate 1 for pretty much this reason. :)
The only features I'd really love to add to TextMate are the rmate remote launching feature (which didn't work for me when I tried TextMate 2 a couple of months ago) and syntax highlighting for Perl 6 (which as far as I know no editor has yet).
The only features I'd really love to add to TextMate are the rmate remote launching feature (which didn't work for me when I tried TextMate 2 a couple of months ago) and syntax highlighting for Perl 6 (which as far as I know no editor has yet).
> syntax highlighting for Perl 6 (which as far as I know no editor has yet).
You mean, besides standard vim 7.3? Also, here's[1] an emacs mode.
1: https://github.com/lue/p6mode
You mean, besides standard vim 7.3? Also, here's[1] an emacs mode.
1: https://github.com/lue/p6mode
I know nothing about Perl, but there is this[1].
[1]: https://sublime.wbond.net/packages/ModernPerl
[1]: https://sublime.wbond.net/packages/ModernPerl
Several powerful new plugins depend on Vim 7.4
Updating your editor, adding plugins, or changing to a new editor is never an issue of "fully capable" or "good enough". It's always whether there are new ways to save time.
Lots of people thought editors were "fully capable" before the "go-to any symbol" functionality was introduced (possibly by Sublime). Now they can't live without it.
But besides all that, Sublime has lots of bugs that impact daily work. If it were in bug-fix mode, where plugins were adding new features, that would be fine. That's not the case.
Lots of people thought editors were "fully capable" before the "go-to any symbol" functionality was introduced (possibly by Sublime). Now they can't live without it.
But besides all that, Sublime has lots of bugs that impact daily work. If it were in bug-fix mode, where plugins were adding new features, that would be fine. That's not the case.
>Updating your editor, adding plugins, or changing to a new editor is never an issue of "fully capable" or "good enough". It's always whether there are new ways to save time.
Well, most people don't update their editor that often. People use Vim and Emacs, even decade old versions of them. Adding plugins, yes, that happens (again, not all the time, except for fiddly people like us I guess). But ST has a fully capable plugin system.
>Lots of people thought editors were "fully capable" before the "go-to any symbol" functionality was introduced (possibly by Sublime). Now they can't live without it
Well, yes, ST3 added that, and I know about it, and I seldom use it. On the other hand, that doesn't mean if I a new feature I like in Emacs or some other editor, I'll change editors just like that.
Well, most people don't update their editor that often. People use Vim and Emacs, even decade old versions of them. Adding plugins, yes, that happens (again, not all the time, except for fiddly people like us I guess). But ST has a fully capable plugin system.
>Lots of people thought editors were "fully capable" before the "go-to any symbol" functionality was introduced (possibly by Sublime). Now they can't live without it
Well, yes, ST3 added that, and I know about it, and I seldom use it. On the other hand, that doesn't mean if I a new feature I like in Emacs or some other editor, I'll change editors just like that.
"However, development is still active: when I spoke to Jon today he advised me that not only does he expect an update to the beta in August, he has also started mapping out some frameworks for version 4 which will help guide future development."
https://www.sublimetext.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16517
https://www.sublimetext.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16517
[deleted]
On the main site, it used the name one. It also says it aims to be the successor, not that it is the successor. I wouldn't feel disrespected if someone did this. I would be a bit bummed someone is trying to take my paying user base but that's about it.
How do you feel about "Open Office" and "Libre Office" piggybacking on the name of the Office suite that was popularized by Microsoft?
Lime has been around for a little while now, it seems to have a fairly functional backend but still awaiting a high quality frontend implementation. Part of what sets ST apart is the frontend.
One of the most impressive goals on the roadmap is to implement a terminal frontend as well as a QT frontend, which I'm quite excited to see.
Arch users can install Lime from AUR: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lime-git/
One of the most impressive goals on the roadmap is to implement a terminal frontend as well as a QT frontend, which I'm quite excited to see.
Arch users can install Lime from AUR: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lime-git/
> One of the most impressive goals on the roadmap is to implement a terminal frontend as well as a QT frontend, which I'm quite excited to see.
I'm also interested to see this. I've said before that I think Go could be a really interesting language to develop GUI software in, however the existing QML package is "alpha quality". I've considered writing GUI software in Go, but at this point I think it would be a mistake given that most, if not all, GUI bindings in Go (and please correct me if I'm wrong) are considered experimental or alpha quality. In theory this will mean the author's progress will be somewhat dependent on the go-qml project, and may involve fixing bugs upstream.
If it were me, I would probably choose another language just based on the maturity of Go's current GUI bindings.
I'm also interested to see this. I've said before that I think Go could be a really interesting language to develop GUI software in, however the existing QML package is "alpha quality". I've considered writing GUI software in Go, but at this point I think it would be a mistake given that most, if not all, GUI bindings in Go (and please correct me if I'm wrong) are considered experimental or alpha quality. In theory this will mean the author's progress will be somewhat dependent on the go-qml project, and may involve fixing bugs upstream.
If it were me, I would probably choose another language just based on the maturity of Go's current GUI bindings.
[deleted]
Oh goodness, I'm sorry, but I can't get past that chunky window toolbar. I use editors like sublime instead of an IDE so my screen real estate isn't taken up by buttons to leave as much room as possible for my code.
If that isn't right, there must be untold frustrations in the path of using this editor for me that I don't care to discover.
If that isn't right, there must be untold frustrations in the path of using this editor for me that I don't care to discover.
The frontends are barely started yet, most development focus so far has been backend including plugin and Textmate compatibility.
> I use editors like sublime instead of an IDE so my screen real estate isn't taken up by buttons to leave as much room as possible for my code
Why not use something in a terminal with almost no interface then, say emacs or vi. All they require you to have is a mental model of what you are working on which you should have anyway/
Why not use something in a terminal with almost no interface then, say emacs or vi. All they require you to have is a mental model of what you are working on which you should have anyway/
If parent is like me: I like to use a pointer device, particularly together with sublimes multicursor implementation. See some entries that you want to edit simultaneously, but their pattern is complex to express? In emacs I would just give up and do it manually, in Sublime I can hold down Command, click each position and then apply any edit command. Happens very often in my kind of work.
I got exactly the same behaviour in emacs by installing the 'multiple-cursors package and adding the following to my .emacs file
(require 'multiple-cursors) (global-unset-key (kbd "M-<down-mouse-1>")) (global-set-key (kbd "M-<mouse-1>") 'mc/add-cursor-on-click)
(require 'multiple-cursors) (global-unset-key (kbd "M-<down-mouse-1>")) (global-set-key (kbd "M-<mouse-1>") 'mc/add-cursor-on-click)
Ok that's interesting. The following features are also crucial to me:
* Tree view
* Split window with synchronized views when showing the same file
* Regex search over file or selection, results can be turned into multicursors (!)
* Regex search over multiple files or directories
* Multicursors at each line for a selection
* Auto-update of views when file underneath changes (editor should ask what to do in case of edits)
I'm sure all of this can be achieved with Emacs - my question is: How long will it take me to set up? Will the result be portable, e.g. can I copy some config file unto any POSIX machine and use it from there in an ssh terminal? That last point would be the main draw for me on why to switch to Emacs, since with Sublime I have to mount the drives (with Expandrive) which works well for the essential things, however there are details like the treeview not updating in that case.
* Tree view
* Split window with synchronized views when showing the same file
* Regex search over file or selection, results can be turned into multicursors (!)
* Regex search over multiple files or directories
* Multicursors at each line for a selection
* Auto-update of views when file underneath changes (editor should ask what to do in case of edits)
I'm sure all of this can be achieved with Emacs - my question is: How long will it take me to set up? Will the result be portable, e.g. can I copy some config file unto any POSIX machine and use it from there in an ssh terminal? That last point would be the main draw for me on why to switch to Emacs, since with Sublime I have to mount the drives (with Expandrive) which works well for the essential things, however there are details like the treeview not updating in that case.
As an active Emacs user, I can confirm the answer of all of the above is "yes". Heck, it even has a Tetris and a Psychiatrist built in.
My .emacs is portable and I use it across Linux, OS X and Windows. Of course it's based on my personal preferences (vim emulation anyone?) and I seldom see people sharing the same config except maybe Bozhidar's Emacs prelude https://github.com/bbatsov/prelude
My .emacs is portable and I use it across Linux, OS X and Windows. Of course it's based on my personal preferences (vim emulation anyone?) and I seldom see people sharing the same config except maybe Bozhidar's Emacs prelude https://github.com/bbatsov/prelude
What about
Regex search over file or selection, results can be turned into multicursors (!)
? GP described 'require multicursors', which I presume is an emacs package. Does it come with regex search integration?
Regex search over file or selection, results can be turned into multicursors (!)
? GP described 'require multicursors', which I presume is an emacs package. Does it come with regex search integration?
It probably doesn't, but I would be very highly surprised if you couldn't compose the actions together with a couple lines of lisp
perhaps
M-x mc/mark-all-in-region-regexp
though I just installed multiple-cursors now, have never tried Sublime so no idea what the deal is with these multiple cursors
M-x mc/mark-all-in-region-regexp
though I just installed multiple-cursors now, have never tried Sublime so no idea what the deal is with these multiple cursors
Interesting, I guess it is just an editing preference. Multiple cursors i associate with mouse use (I know it isn't the same but I bet most people use the mouse with them). I consider touching the mouse dangerous for myself and for productivity.
> Tree View
This i fully understand (and exisits in emacs) but I think not necessary either for my workflow. A treeview does already exist in a format called folders and files ;) I prefer to know the structure of the directories I'm working in and rarely require a reference to them visually
> Split window with synchronized views when showing the same file
I do too and this is a very basic emacs feature
> Regex
Emacs has a massive number of regex and non regex search options. Though usually i simply use Ctrl-Z; grep; fg, which is less efficient but fits my mental model better.
But ctrl-h a <regex> has ~ 34 commands on my machine. Including things like dired-do-isearch-regexp
> Multicursors at each line for a selection
No idea what this means sadly!
> Auto-update of views when file underneath changes (editor should ask what to do in case of edits)
I doubt any editor handles this stuff as well as emacs and is invoked in my environments daily.
Apart from multicursor stuff (that i do not see the point of for my workflow) everything you mention is a very very old basic emacs feature.
> Tree View
This i fully understand (and exisits in emacs) but I think not necessary either for my workflow. A treeview does already exist in a format called folders and files ;) I prefer to know the structure of the directories I'm working in and rarely require a reference to them visually
> Split window with synchronized views when showing the same file
I do too and this is a very basic emacs feature
> Regex
Emacs has a massive number of regex and non regex search options. Though usually i simply use Ctrl-Z; grep; fg, which is less efficient but fits my mental model better.
But ctrl-h a <regex> has ~ 34 commands on my machine. Including things like dired-do-isearch-regexp
> Multicursors at each line for a selection
No idea what this means sadly!
> Auto-update of views when file underneath changes (editor should ask what to do in case of edits)
I doubt any editor handles this stuff as well as emacs and is invoked in my environments daily.
Apart from multicursor stuff (that i do not see the point of for my workflow) everything you mention is a very very old basic emacs feature.
multicursors are useful for repeated patterns of text which need simultaneous /editing/. The regex-replace-all is not good enough apparently. Mostly HTML or siblings I would guess (I really hope not code!!). This is mostly /visual/ editing. I have used them and I dont think they are the bees' knees. I dont use mouse much while editing.
Multicursors are one of these things that you don't understand the use for, until you start using them, at which point you can never go back. In order to understand what they do, just have a look at all six gifs on this page: http://www.sublimetext.com/.
And sorry, but if you don't know about multicursors, I'm not sure whether you get what I mean with "Regex search over file or selection, results can be turned into multicursors". Just have a look at the animations in above URL. Can emacs do that without turning this into a big modding project?
And sorry, but if you don't know about multicursors, I'm not sure whether you get what I mean with "Regex search over file or selection, results can be turned into multicursors". Just have a look at the animations in above URL. Can emacs do that without turning this into a big modding project?
gif1: It seems the multiple-cursors package does this, though I don't quite see the point when you have regex-replace.
gif2: I typically do this kind of stuff with CUA-rectangles: http://trey-jackson.blogspot.no/2008/10/emacs-tip-26-cua-mod... Looks about the same.
gif3: looks like M-x, though there are newer alternatives to M-x like smex that do more fancy matching: http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/Smex I feel like I'm faster with plain M-x, though haven't really given smex much of a chance
gif4: There's a million packages that do this in various different ways (using recent files, VC-tracked files, bookmarks, Meta-dot with TAGS or parsers to go from symbols to definitions, etc.). I suppose people have different preferences for how to navigate quickly to other files.
gif5: M-x occur is built-in. There's also multi-occur to show over several files, or occur-edit to edit directly from the list of hits without going into the file itself, etc.
gif6: regex-replace also has been built-in forever, mc/mark-all-in-region-regexp seems to match this UI more closely though.
But I'm sure lots of the newer Emacs packages have been inspired by Sublime or TextMate (or vim!) :-)
gif2: I typically do this kind of stuff with CUA-rectangles: http://trey-jackson.blogspot.no/2008/10/emacs-tip-26-cua-mod... Looks about the same.
gif3: looks like M-x, though there are newer alternatives to M-x like smex that do more fancy matching: http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/Smex I feel like I'm faster with plain M-x, though haven't really given smex much of a chance
gif4: There's a million packages that do this in various different ways (using recent files, VC-tracked files, bookmarks, Meta-dot with TAGS or parsers to go from symbols to definitions, etc.). I suppose people have different preferences for how to navigate quickly to other files.
gif5: M-x occur is built-in. There's also multi-occur to show over several files, or occur-edit to edit directly from the list of hits without going into the file itself, etc.
gif6: regex-replace also has been built-in forever, mc/mark-all-in-region-regexp seems to match this UI more closely though.
But I'm sure lots of the newer Emacs packages have been inspired by Sublime or TextMate (or vim!) :-)
Thank you!
Here's a datapoint against it. I forced myself to use multicursors for a while but I don't see the point at all. It's a more clumsy way to do replacements.
So multicursor is an unhygenic version of semantic rename (refactoring)? Ew.
No, multicursors are way more powerful because you don't have to rename something in order to use them. The second animation on http://www.sublimetext.com/ is a use case that has occured several times to me alone, and there are more (e.g. indenting only specific lines, aligning code).
In many (most?) OS X applications you can right click the toolbar and chose "Use Small Size". Perhaps so in this app too...
Sublime Text is a sublime textbook example for small shops/single devs wishing to make a dent in the status quo.
Love the problem space. Look around. Listen to input from good counsellors, ignore the negative "it already exists your reinventing the wheel" and the "i'll try it when it has x".
Here's what the author got as initial feedback. If he had let that negativity get to him we wouldn't have sublime. http://www.sublimetext.com/blog/articles/anatomy-of-a-next-g...
I suggest a high pass filter on comments on your current project: smart people with helpful comments know how to give valuable feedback to even the worst idea without negativity.
Cheers, and march on! GLTA F
Love the problem space. Look around. Listen to input from good counsellors, ignore the negative "it already exists your reinventing the wheel" and the "i'll try it when it has x".
Here's what the author got as initial feedback. If he had let that negativity get to him we wouldn't have sublime. http://www.sublimetext.com/blog/articles/anatomy-of-a-next-g...
I suggest a high pass filter on comments on your current project: smart people with helpful comments know how to give valuable feedback to even the worst idea without negativity.
Cheers, and march on! GLTA F
I'm not opposed to an open-source text editor that aims to replicate features of a closed-source application. But "Lime Text" is clearly riding on the success of "Sublime Text", and it irks me because "Sublime Text" isn't owned by a big large company or someone with a lot of money - it's a project that started as someone's side-project and has just recently started as a full-time job.
John, the author, has been clear in the past that if for some reason he no longer wants to continue developing Sublime Text, he'd open-source it so it wouldn't rot in the bit graveyard.
Yes, GIMP rides the coattails of Photoshop, and LibreOffice rides the coattails of Microsoft Office; but these are commercial applications that are supported and paid for by consumers. Sublime Text is optional. Sublime Text is free, but you can pay for it - if you like.
Change the tag-line and keep the name.
John, the author, has been clear in the past that if for some reason he no longer wants to continue developing Sublime Text, he'd open-source it so it wouldn't rot in the bit graveyard.
Yes, GIMP rides the coattails of Photoshop, and LibreOffice rides the coattails of Microsoft Office; but these are commercial applications that are supported and paid for by consumers. Sublime Text is optional. Sublime Text is free, but you can pay for it - if you like.
Change the tag-line and keep the name.
Am I the only one who immediately wondered how Atom was doing when seeing this article? :D
I would love for Atom to make some progress. The last time I tried it I really liked it, however it was way too slow to be useful to me. There was a perceivable delay between when I typed a character and when it showed up on screen.
This is a deal breaker for an IDE, IMHO. Then again, it is a really young editor and has a lot of room to grow and mature. So, here's to both Lime Text & Atom. May our text processing future be bright!
This is a deal breaker for an IDE, IMHO. Then again, it is a really young editor and has a lot of room to grow and mature. So, here's to both Lime Text & Atom. May our text processing future be bright!
If you liked what you saw, you should try it again soon. There core editor components were rewritten in React, which lead to some noticeable performance gains:
http://blog.atom.io/2014/07/02/moving-atom-to-react.html
Beyond that, there are also more performance optimizations coming:
https://github.com/atom/atom/pull/3154
The only two things I miss from Sublime are "find in project" and "go to symbol in project". Atom's implementations of those need some work. But everything else is as good or better than Sublime. And it's really easy to contribute and get pull requests merged.
As far as I can tell from watching development, GitHub has at least 4 full-time engineers working on Atom.
http://blog.atom.io/2014/07/02/moving-atom-to-react.html
Beyond that, there are also more performance optimizations coming:
https://github.com/atom/atom/pull/3154
The only two things I miss from Sublime are "find in project" and "go to symbol in project". Atom's implementations of those need some work. But everything else is as good or better than Sublime. And it's really easy to contribute and get pull requests merged.
As far as I can tell from watching development, GitHub has at least 4 full-time engineers working on Atom.
A dom object for every character probably makes it forever an uphill battle.
Indeed. Atom will never be fast enough. Because of the "cool" underlying tech chosen.
To be honest, as a ST plugin developer, the underlying tech is very cool, except for JS/Coffee maybe.
You can do pretty much any UI you can imagine using a website in some way and Atom allows you to do exactly that. You can modify the entire UI and this is what I was always missing in ST: The ability to modify the UI more extensivly.
Sadly, this all leads to the very downside that everyone knows: Performance. Computers will eventually get to the point where Atom feels as fast as Sublime, because 1) the coding was improved and more significantly, and 2) CPUs will get good enough for Atom that a human can't see differences between Atom and ST's performance, despite ST being way faster still. It's always been like that.
You can do pretty much any UI you can imagine using a website in some way and Atom allows you to do exactly that. You can modify the entire UI and this is what I was always missing in ST: The ability to modify the UI more extensivly.
Sadly, this all leads to the very downside that everyone knows: Performance. Computers will eventually get to the point where Atom feels as fast as Sublime, because 1) the coding was improved and more significantly, and 2) CPUs will get good enough for Atom that a human can't see differences between Atom and ST's performance, despite ST being way faster still. It's always been like that.
Given 640K is enough for anyone?
Atom has some performance issues, but they are mostly on opening windows (this is compounded by the fact that Atom really likes to open new editor windows, e.g., for "Open File"). I don't notice the actual editor itself lagging.
Yes, me too. The last time I looked it was only for Mac users, which is totally wrong for a HTML based editor. Didn't mind looking a second time (until I hear some great buzz, I guess).
I'm also curious about this vim reimplementation some guys are working on. I'll go and check that out right now!
I'm also curious about this vim reimplementation some guys are working on. I'll go and check that out right now!
You can use it on linux! It's really fine on my setup.
Atom might not be up to Sublime Text levels of quality, but I find it much nicer than the defaults gedit and kate.
No, me too wondered.
I applaud the open approach, but I don't see the need to reference Sublime Text to increase traction. Why not market this as a cool new feature rich editor implemented in Go (with the bonus of having all the ST / TextMate compatibility to go?)
In fact, why does Lime reference Sublime Text at all?
In fact, why does Lime reference Sublime Text at all?
From (https://github.com/limetext/lime/wiki/Goals) it is largely aiming to be a drop in replacement :
- Compatible with Textmate color schemes (which is what ST is using) - Compatible with Textmate syntax definitions (which again is what ST is using) - Compatible with Textmate snippets - Compatible with Sublime Text’s python plugin API. I’ll probably never implement this 100%, only the api bits I need for the plugins I use. - Compatible with Sublime Text’s keybindings and settings (think most of it is working) - Compatible with Sublime Text snippets - Sublime Text’s Goto anything panel
- Compatible with Textmate color schemes (which is what ST is using) - Compatible with Textmate syntax definitions (which again is what ST is using) - Compatible with Textmate snippets - Compatible with Sublime Text’s python plugin API. I’ll probably never implement this 100%, only the api bits I need for the plugins I use. - Compatible with Sublime Text’s keybindings and settings (think most of it is working) - Compatible with Sublime Text snippets - Sublime Text’s Goto anything panel
Love the fact that the backend is in GoLang. And just like all of you, Sublime Text is one of those few apps where you actually feel like contributing to the developers. The only thing to do now is get on the IRC and check it out.
If this can print, I'll move over when it's read. I adore Sublime Text but having to c&p out of it to print is a bit of an annoyance for me. Otherwise it's a perfect app, I adore it.
Out of interest, what do you print code from Sublime? Interested in hearing why you need to print code, if that's the case.
That's a huge assumption, that one can only use Sublime for code.
Personally, I pick a single text editor and use it for all my plain text editing needs.
I don't print very often, but when I do, I do it for a reason. Just the other day, I was creating some offline study information for my child. Printing was my only option.
I was editing away in Sublime and then when I went to print, I opened up the File menu and looked a second before I remembered... "Oh yeah, this application knows better than I do about my need to print". Muttering to myself, I copy/pasted the document into Word and continued on my way.
Personally, I pick a single text editor and use it for all my plain text editing needs.
I don't print very often, but when I do, I do it for a reason. Just the other day, I was creating some offline study information for my child. Printing was my only option.
I was editing away in Sublime and then when I went to print, I opened up the File menu and looked a second before I remembered... "Oh yeah, this application knows better than I do about my need to print". Muttering to myself, I copy/pasted the document into Word and continued on my way.
Sublime is first and foremost a text editor, so I don't think it's a stretch to think people would use it for text editing.
Sublime is great but I must admit it is going the way of textmate in lack of support. Developer should open source it and get contributors working on it. Like someone suggested he can raise money on kickstarter to take it to next level and maybe charge for a pro version which he can add extra features to if he wants.
Personally I am using Sublime still but the next time I have to pay for a license won't be for sublime. Most likely going the IntelliJ Idea route.
Name for Lime Text is shameless :-) Come on you could have come up with something original !
Personally I am using Sublime still but the next time I have to pay for a license won't be for sublime. Most likely going the IntelliJ Idea route.
Name for Lime Text is shameless :-) Come on you could have come up with something original !
Just for information. I was using sublimeText 3. I updated two weeks ago the last release (Build 3059) and even (Build 3062) and it crashes.. since I don't want to bother using a close thing that crashes. I switched to atom.io And so far It's way better than three months ago (It's now fast enough) And It's really getting traction on the plugin side also.. I don't think I'll ever come back to sublimetext. I even went back to emacs for one week.
atom.io is not fast enough, not even close. Not for a professional developer who is using it 8+ hours a day.
Sorry for being an 10+ hours a day professional developer more productive on atom.io (latest) than on a buggy sublime text 3
Well, see, you could only be an 8+ hours a day professional developer… :-)
I have seen peasant art students shell out insane amount of cash for photoshop, etc. Hell a calculus textbook for first year college is cheaper than sublime text.
You know software developers are dirt poor ( or really cheap ) when they cannot shell out 60 dollars for a piece of software they use everyday. Sublime puts so many expensive IDEs to shame and it costs a fraction ( as a donation ) and people still are up in arms about it.
You know software developers are dirt poor ( or really cheap ) when they cannot shell out 60 dollars for a piece of software they use everyday. Sublime puts so many expensive IDEs to shame and it costs a fraction ( as a donation ) and people still are up in arms about it.
I use Kate as my main editor, and I have contributed $100 in the last year to the KDE project. That is a bit more than the cost of a Sublime license, at least.
It is not about cost. It is about freedom. And there is no way I'm giving someone money to take away my software freedoms if I have an alternative. And I will always give the free alternative the money I would have spent on the proprietary one.
It is not about cost. It is about freedom. And there is no way I'm giving someone money to take away my software freedoms if I have an alternative. And I will always give the free alternative the money I would have spent on the proprietary one.
I agree, sublime could have been made open source. But compared to the elephant in the room ( VS ), Sublime is mostly open source ( all its plugins are ). Their core could have been made open source. but I think its an act of self-preservation by the creator which I do not have a problem with.
If there is One project where a lot of developers would want to hack is definitely their own editor!
It's a big dilemma, I love the idea of seeing an open alternative but I also love the possibility to support developers working on what they love!
One problem that raise here is that we haven't find a way to ensure that open source projects can bring an incomes to their maintainers, even if there is many users.
One problem that raise here is that we haven't find a way to ensure that open source projects can bring an incomes to their maintainers, even if there is many users.
Does it support Code completion akin to SublimeClang?
That plugin is pretty much the reason I'm sticking to Sublime Text 2 (can't get it to work with 3).
I know it's from the same author as lime, but according to the github description he lost interest in C/C++, so I'm wondering if this feature is to be implemented still?
Or is lime compatible with the old ST2 plugin?
Isn't Atom the open source Sublime Text clone?
Atom and Light Table seem to be open source editors largely in the same vein as ST (I wouldn't say they are clones).
Isn't Light Table more focused on being an editor-REPL combination than being a text editor?
All three are focussed on being plug-in extensible into full IDEs for various languages, and have a generally similar design aesthetic that contrasts to earlier GUI editors, which is why I say they are in the same vein.
Yes, they have feature and focus differences (which is why I say Atom and LT aren't clones of ST), and one of those is Light Table's having inline evaluation as a central feature.
Yes, they have feature and focus differences (which is why I say Atom and LT aren't clones of ST), and one of those is Light Table's having inline evaluation as a central feature.
atom.io is nothing but an icon in the Finder for me until they fix the terrible performance bottlenecks. i really like the app / features / ux, etc. but the performance is abysmal compared to sublime.
The new update switched to React on the background, and it feels much snappier, but It still groans like a dying whale at least a few times a day though.
That would mean a rewrite in a compiled language, like go.
"The"? This isn't the Highlander, there can be more than one.
Few months ago I moved from ST but I would come back to a similar open source solution if it implemented IDE features on packages. So I can have two shortcuts, one opens with everything IDE-like, the second one would only load a few packages and be very Sublime-ish. Fast and simple.
Out of interest what did you move to?
PhpStorm (jetbrains.com/phpstorm), but it's not open source :(
there are lot of free options too, like NetBeans
there are lot of free options too, like NetBeans
Netbeans is fantastic for PHP editing, except the go-to-anything functionality is terrible out of the box. Even after configuring, it's not as good as ST. Other than that, it's excellent.
Always great with more competition, hopefully it will result in better editors for everyone.
I wish someone would make SourceInsight for OSX, it's by far the best editor I've ever used but it's only available for Windows.
Is there a binary somewhere?
One of the things I like most about Sublime over Atom or Light Table, is the chosen colors for highlights. I think Lime needs a little more improvement in that area to make me switch.
Cool! I hope the community of SublimeText/Emacs/Vim/ will not tear you a new one. As editor wars always tend to get quite heated..
I wander why SlickEdit is not as popular as Sublime Text? Is this due to price? Otherwise, SE is quite powerful and extensible as well.
ST leveraged the popularity of TextMate and its ecosystem with support for TextMate bundles. Given the popularity of open-source tools and how that makes it harder to launch a pay tool, I thinks its a big boost for a payware tool if its able to capitalize on the popularity and ecosystem of an existing pay tool just at the time when people are looking for an alternative to it.
We have licenses for SlickEdit at work, and I love it. But never in a million years would I pay $500 for a text editor.
I like that it's being developed with separate front ends (QML and Console).
Always good with more editors. But i think that Atom will be the next sublime.
Please go into more details why you think that. After the first buzz of the semi open beta I didn't hear _anything_ about Atom. And last time I checked it only worked on Mac and I couldn't even compile it myself on Linux. Beside having a great idea it is also important how a project is executed.
Not sure about that. It eats processor cycles and chews up battery life. For no discernible advantage.
IMHO there's no need for an OS version of sublime. Sublime is working fine, stable, has a free unlimited trial. It makes no sense to make a verbatim "copy". Maybe he can prepare a release into OS if the proverbial bus hits him?
Interesting take on the GUI.
I'm sure it's taken a load of work and is still in early stages, but describing yourself as the successor of Sublime Text when it looks as shit as that.. that's some brass!
It's described as 'aiming to become a successor'. Everyone can set their goals wherever they wish. Whether they get there is another thing.
Also, I think it's weird that the fact that it's made in Go is part of the pitch. I mean, unless I'm contributing... I don't care. You could write it in brainfuck if it does the job.