|
|
|
|
|
by mbStavola
812 days ago
|
|
While I understood the maintainer's arguments for wanting to adopt a Scheme-like for plugins, I can't help but be a bit disappointed. Helix being written in Rust meant that I felt very comfortable looking at the source code which gave me the confidence that if I wanted to implement something, I could reasonably do so. Furthermore, the idea that plugins could've been in Rust or Rust through WASM meant that I'd have an editor which was completely hackable in the least annoying way possible. Every time I have to learn one of these tool-specific languages I end up breathing a heavy sigh, spending a lot of time relearning things or working around weird quirks, and then ultimately giving up after writing the most basic version of what I want to do. Ultimately, this is just a me problem and I really can't complain about something I haven't paid for or substantially contributed to. Maybe it'll actually be awesome and I'll change my mind completely, maybe they'll reconsider and add Rust-based plugins. Helix as an editor is awesome and I'm just going to have to trust the developers. |
|
Take two programs with historical success in building this kind of plugin system: Emacs and Browser. The number of non-programmers who can write elisp (or javascript) but won't dare to touch C/C++ code in the core layer probably outweighs the opposite by a huge factor.