Back when I explored helix as a long-time vim user, I had some LSPs set up with neovim. But I was very much in doubt how to take advantage of these LSPs and what kind of configuration options make sense. The "hard" part is understanding what LSPs can do for you and what kind of key bindings I need to set up, so that I can use the relevant features.
Helix gives you a sane user interface to LSPs that is discoverable
I think a lot of people on this site have genuine reading comprehension problems. I mean that as an observation, not an attack.
> "Using vim/nvim for 20 years". "cba to configure LSPs its too hard". What?
Nowhere did she say that she tried and failed to set these up. Your comment indicates that you read it as her saying that it's too hard to do. Where did that come from?
She said it "felt like too much work" which is A) unrelated to difficulty and is B) something that you can say after you've done the thing, just as legitimately as you can say it before you do the thing.
Being able to recognize that something that works just fine but isn't right, and not being satisfied with that is a skill whose importance is difficult to convey. It is related to the sense people get after a while that gives them an allergy to unnecessary complexity. Complexity is fine if it is required. The zero-step LSP set up procedure for Helix proves that the multi-step LSP set up procedure for vim can be improved.
When someone is competent, as must be after using a tool for 20 years (not days). Expecting that someone to complain about a difficulty for something trivial is surprising. There are other ways to highlight that it is easier or simpler in Helix to have working LSP, for example, saying it is "as easy as in vscode". But it is definitely bewildering why would the OP choose to start by bragging of the vast experience, and then focus on a complaint that most people expect from someone who has very little experience.
> Expecting that someone to complain about a difficulty for something trivial is surprising.
Is it? It isn't to me. It's expected, to me. As I've gotten older I've gotten much, much less tolerant of convoluted and unnecessarily complex hoops (which I collectively call "bullshit") that must be jumped through in order to get something working. Especially when there is an alternative nearby which puts me through zero hoops.
When I was young and Linux was brand new I had all the time in the world for compiling, patching, debugging, fixing, compiling, testing, deploying, logging, parsing, notifying, writing tooling and customizing. As I enter my 6th decade I have zero time for most of those things. The mere thought of that kind of thing today for almost all software is anathema. And anything that makes me do anything that should have been sorted out by the software author but wasn't immediately goes to the bottom of the list of consideration for any purpose in the future.
> LSPs its too hard". What?
Back when I explored helix as a long-time vim user, I had some LSPs set up with neovim. But I was very much in doubt how to take advantage of these LSPs and what kind of configuration options make sense. The "hard" part is understanding what LSPs can do for you and what kind of key bindings I need to set up, so that I can use the relevant features.
Helix gives you a sane user interface to LSPs that is discoverable
I think a lot of people on this site have genuine reading comprehension problems. I mean that as an observation, not an attack.
> "Using vim/nvim for 20 years". "cba to configure LSPs its too hard". What?
Nowhere did she say that she tried and failed to set these up. Your comment indicates that you read it as her saying that it's too hard to do. Where did that come from?
She said it "felt like too much work" which is A) unrelated to difficulty and is B) something that you can say after you've done the thing, just as legitimately as you can say it before you do the thing.
Being able to recognize that something that works just fine but isn't right, and not being satisfied with that is a skill whose importance is difficult to convey. It is related to the sense people get after a while that gives them an allergy to unnecessary complexity. Complexity is fine if it is required. The zero-step LSP set up procedure for Helix proves that the multi-step LSP set up procedure for vim can be improved.
When someone is competent, as must be after using a tool for 20 years (not days). Expecting that someone to complain about a difficulty for something trivial is surprising. There are other ways to highlight that it is easier or simpler in Helix to have working LSP, for example, saying it is "as easy as in vscode". But it is definitely bewildering why would the OP choose to start by bragging of the vast experience, and then focus on a complaint that most people expect from someone who has very little experience.
> Expecting that someone to complain about a difficulty for something trivial is surprising.
Is it? It isn't to me. It's expected, to me. As I've gotten older I've gotten much, much less tolerant of convoluted and unnecessarily complex hoops (which I collectively call "bullshit") that must be jumped through in order to get something working. Especially when there is an alternative nearby which puts me through zero hoops.
When I was young and Linux was brand new I had all the time in the world for compiling, patching, debugging, fixing, compiling, testing, deploying, logging, parsing, notifying, writing tooling and customizing. As I enter my 6th decade I have zero time for most of those things. The mere thought of that kind of thing today for almost all software is anathema. And anything that makes me do anything that should have been sorted out by the software author but wasn't immediately goes to the bottom of the list of consideration for any purpose in the future.