this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
130 points (97.1% liked)

Linux

48318 readers
947 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I used vi and then neovim for about 20 years (like the other @pimeys). I switched to kakoune first because nvim's plugins were a mess and the LSP integration was unreliable. With all the plugins needed to get a decent dev editor, startup was starting to get slow. Kakoune had multi-select. But mainly, I switched because one necessary plugin (I think it was the LSP one) insisted on starting a nodejs server. Plugins were written in whatever, and running nvim meant spawning Ruby, Python, NodeJS, and whatever else processes; I switched because the nvim ecosystem was getting as bloated as EMACS.

I bounced from Kakoune to Helix after a couple of years, because Kakoune relies heavily on chording, and modality (pressing a key to get into a mode to do something or some things) is superficial; Helix makes much greater use of modes, often nested, and feels much more faithful to the vi philosophy to me. Also, Tree-Sitter is a disruptive technology.

[–] stepanzak@iusearchlinux.fyi 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why is Tree-Sitter a disruptive technology?

[–] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because, while many people are unaware of it or have beard of it but don't know what it does, it's a novel, well-executed, reusable solution that is incredible at what it does. Ot's disruptive in the sense that I believe it's changing how programs that need to parse code are written, and they'll become faster to write, faster to execute, and better for it.

Not big-D disruptive, as in changing the face of computer science, but little-D, as in having a quiet but disproportionate impact on a lot of software.

[–] stepanzak@iusearchlinux.fyi 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh, I thought disruptive is a negative adjective. Translator translates it to my language as a negative adjective.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your translator is right! The word does have negative connotations, in that the status quo is being disrupted. In the context of technology, it loses that connotation. It can mean something good, but not necessarily. Google was disruptive; was it for better, or worse? Tesla was too, but in the end, probably for the better. I'd argue that e-bikes are disruptive in the US, as they're getting huge numbers of Americans who otherwise wouldn't out of their cars for small trips.

[–] stepanzak@iusearchlinux.fyi 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So it's basically something with big impact?

[–] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's reasonably synonymous.

[–] stepanzak@iusearchlinux.fyi 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks for explanation!