1. 30
  1. 4

    I am slightly disappointed that this isn’t the game Doom ported to run in emacs.

    1. 4

      I switched to doom last year after a few years of my custom emacs setup becoming a mess. Doom is great. It’s pretty easy to add any packages it doesn’t come included with.

      1. 2

        Same! I was using plain vim and emacs for years and Doom is the best of both worlds. Everything works out of the box and keybindings are super intuitive and consistent.

      2. 3

        Spacemacs is a popular alternative Emacs framework.

        A week ago, I tried to research the difference between Doom and Spacemacs, but I didn’t learn of any fundamental differences. Both frameworks support either Emacs or Vim keybindings. Both define systems of keybindings starting with the Space key, though I imagine some specific key bindings might be different. And both of them come with optional modules/layers of configuration that you can supplement with your own Elisp.

        After my exploration a week ago, I ended up sticking with my existing Spacemacs config because I couldn’t even install Doom on my work computer – the install command dumped a five-page Elisp stack trace about a nil somewhere. However, that error may have only happened because I was using a corporate proxy with network issues.

        1. 3

          spacemacs, in my experience was a little too abstracted from the emacs base and you had to point to the dev branch which was wildly unstable. I hope it has gotten better

          1. 3

            Can confirm this; we get a lot of questions in the #emacs channel on libera from people who are confused about the basics and no one can answer them because they’ve seemingly-arbitrarily gone and changed a bunch of stuff from the normal Emacs way without really explaining how.

            1. 2

              I’m not sure what you mean by confused users having “seemingly-arbitrarily gone and changed a bunch of stuff”. Do you mean that they just installed Spacemacs, which itself makes changes that seem arbitrary to vanilla Emacs users, or are you saying that Spacemacs users are more likely to make seemingly-arbitrary changes on top of Spacemacs (which they would probably do by editing their .spacemacs file)? Is your comment framework-agnostic – do you also hear from confused Doom users in that channel?

              1. 3

                I mean the first one.

                We get confused Doom users but not as many; I think Doom learned from the mistakes of Spacemacs and either didn’t diverge in config as drastically, or documented things better.

                1. 2

                  Anecdata, as a vim user, I tried spacemacs twice (months or years between) and was kinda completely lost and the second time nothing worked out of the box, not even the install instructions.

                  That day I installed doom and it was kinda nice. I didn’t stick with it, but the experience was so much better,

            2. 1

              I can’t comment on Spacemacs’s level of abstraction relative to Doom, but it is still true that with Spacemacs you have to point to the unstable develop branch to use recent features. For comparison, the develop branch has had 1,488 commits since February 2020, while the master branch has had only one commit (and it’s tiny).

              That’s not as unstable as it sounds, though: Spacemacs won’t update itself automatically on the develop branch even if you set dotspacemacs-check-for-update to t. Your configuration will only update when you choose to run git pull in your ~/.emacs.d. (Spacemacs might update your packages – I forget if it does that automatically – but it lets you roll the package updates back if you think they broke anything.)

            3. 2

              The biggest difference for me was kinda silly, but with Doom I was able to figure out how to set my preferred theme in ~5min, whereas after almost an hour of reading Spacemacs’ documentation, I couldn’t figure out where I could set my preferred theme so that it would load on startup. Small and silly, but it just kept going from there: I was able to grok Doom and how to configure it much more quickly than Spacemacs.

            4. 3

              I don’t use Doom, but I use several packages from it (doom-themes, doom-modeline) in my from-scratch config. That’s the thing I really like about Doom vs. Spacemacs (the latter of which I have used, and later abandoned): a lot of their work is contributed back to the larger community, and isn’t so intertwingled as to be unusable with plain Emacs.

              1. 3

                I was recommended to this by an old friend last week. I looked, and saw nothing for me, TBH.

                I wonder: does anyone do an Emacs config, distro, whatever-you-call-it, for someone who doesn’t know Emacs, doesn’t want to know Emacs, but just wants an as-CUA-compliant-as-possible plain-text editor? Starting with ErgoEmacs, turning off virtually all the code-editing functionality, and leaving something for editing plain human-readable written text? Ideally English, for me, but whatever language is preferred?

                I am not a programmer. I don’t write code. I don’t want syntax highlighting or any of that. But I am deeply curious about the many recommendations of Emacs as the ultimate text editor and writers’ tool.

                The only computer languages I ever deal in, and then reluctantly, are things like extremely-basic HTML 1.0 (think, blog comments level, no more, NOT web pages) and Markdown.

                It seems to me that this would probably appeal to a lot of people, but maybe I’m wrong because I have looked and I can’t find anything like that.

                But requirement #1, not negotiable, is ErgoEmacs, because it makes the program comprehensible by non-Emacs people. Nothing else I’ve ever done does. I’ve been editing text on computers for about 40 years this year and I am not interested in any editor that requires me to learn a new UI.

                1. 3

                  Maybe you need something like this?


                  1. 1

                    Just saw this.

                    Interesting – thanks!

                    Looks like it’s biased towards Lisp folks and a minimal look, which is kinda the opposite of what I was looking for, but that’s interesting and relevant and could be adapted, if they were willing…

                2. 2

                  doom emacs is wonderful, been using it for a while now! still use vim for command line edits though.

                  1. 2

                    I switched from using vi/vim/nvim/ed/ex-vi for 8 years, to doom emacs in 2020. It’s amazing and I seriously see myself using it for the next 10, 20 years

                    1. 2

                      I started with Doom, though to Emacs apprentices I would also suggest trying plain old Emacs first (there’s a package to switch between configs easily called chemacs which is good for this). As great as Doom is, and as much as I prefer vi keybinds, I think it’s worth learning the core concepts before trying one of the “remaster” level configs.

                      1. 1

                        A link to that config switching package: Chemacs 2