How I'm using Helix editor
rushter.com154 points by f311a 6 hours ago
154 points by f311a 6 hours ago
I've recently been on a little side quest to rebuild my editor configurations (20 year Emacs user, 15 year Vim user—in parallel with Emacs because I can't seem to pick a favorite). The goal is to see how quickly I can get to a daily-driving complete setup for enterprise-grade software work largely in Python. My goal for the rebuild is to see how much I can drop as far as reliance on third-party extensions and still have the functionality that I need (or which makes me unreasonably more productive).
My Neovim configuration[0] is currently the best it's been IMO, but I ended up having a few more plugins than I thought I would need.
I am earlier along in my Emacs rebuild, but what is really interesting to me is that there are a lot of improvements in modern versions of Emacs (30+) that dramatically reduce my dependence on third party plug-ins. Eglot has been fantastic for me, as a former long-time lsp-mode user. Completion preview mode is not quite a replacement for corfu, but it's pretty darn good and only going to get better.
So far my list of must have plug-ins for Emacs:
- Magit - Expreg (teeesitter expand region) - Multiple cursors - dape (debugging in coordination with Eglot)
Thinking I will probably end up adding Consult + orderless, too, as that is a search/navigation superpower.
[0] https://github.com/wilkystyle/nvim
edit to add nvim repo link
I'm very interested in reports of 10+ year users of Emacs, how do Helix/Vim compare? I understand reports from zero-to-Helix/Vim users that they're good, but I don't believe they truly understand how great Emacs is unless they really use it for a long time.
But because Vim-like keys and modes seem to be so much better integrated in all other editors these days (no good Emacs mode in VSCode for example), seems like it won, and it'll soon be time to accept that.
But every time I tried – I never had enough patience to use it until my fingers have the memory, and didn't see the point enough to keep smashing the editor.
So, very interested in reports of actual hardcore Emacs users about the switch.
Newer nvim is also slowly eating into the plugins needed. There is a built in plugin manager, diff viewer, and lsp now.
Not a diss but even after spending O(months) do you think it's as good as what you get with Pycharm + IdeaVIM out of the box?
Of course, there are other reasons to build your own configuration but I found purely from "IDE as means to an end" perspective getting into Neovim rabbit hole is a bit of waste of a time
I imagine Pycharm would still be better at refactoring (extract method/variable, in-line variable, etc.) LSPs are good at renaming, but not much else. There's a plug-in, but it breaks very often.
That is quite a lot of nvim plugins to maintain! I just rewrote my nvim last week with 4 plugins (mini.nvim counts as 1). I feel when I stack up too many plugins the stability and reliability of nvim plummets to an annoying level.
I envy that with emacs you feel you only need 2 plugins. That probably operates with a ton more stability.
https://codeberg.org/dannyfritz/dotfiles/src/commit/b647b440...
I'm an Emacs -> VS Code -> Helix convert, have enjoyed using it thus far. I've tried to internalize all the existing keybindings and use thus far rather than configuring it much ( I've wanted to have the least amount of config necessary to be effective with it )
One thing I've struggled with is simply remembering everything it can do. I made a Desktop Mat[0] to help remind me ( literally just finished it so will see how helpful it is when the printed version arrives ).
For how long have you been using Emacs before?
I was an Emacs user for about 3-4 years. I never felt very proficient in it, I always felt like I was cargo culting in config changes that I never felt comfortable with. I liked the power, but never graduated to the point where it felt like it was working with me. AFA why I didn't switch to Vim, there was enough "Vim is great with a great config" which felt so similar to the situation I was already in with Emacs that I just wasn't convinced. Not the greatest rationale, but that's what it was.
I've been using emacs for the last 10 years or so (used Sublime Text before that). I use vim as well from time to time for quick file edits here and there or on remote servers and thought it's fine for that purpose, but I didn't really see the need to use vim exclusively. I'm pretty well settled on emacs now and have my own carefully written modules and functions to get the right setup for me.
I tried helix last month and was immediately hit by how simple it is to get started. It still doesn't come naturally to me, but I managed to quickly get used to the basics: jumping around code, search, yanking/pasting stuff, and switching buffers and windows. I have no idea about its history, but Helix is a very well designed piece of software. Global search is particularly nice, lsp integration just works, it's also exceptionally fast. It feels very nice and comfortable when a software has sane, coherent, and actually-helpful defaults.
I'm definitley going to keep using it and getting myself more accustomed to this way of editing, I will keep emacs as my default, but helix is just so fast it might become my go-to over time for editing code.
At this rate, why not use vim? Half of the configuration is re-creating vim inside Helix. Not to mention, Helix has many dependencies (you just don't see them the way you do in neovim). I think I could make a case that my vim setup is more supply chain safe than Helix.
My current vim8 setup is very simple and has served me well for 8+ years. I'm currently using vim8 because it's what is available within my LTS distribution.
I only use one automatically loaded plugin (`vim-tmux-navigator` to simplify moving between vim splits and tmux splits, it's a passive plugin). I have reviewed the code for the plugin and I don't update it.
I only use two "optional" plugins (you can enable them using vim's built in package manager with :packadd!). I use `ale` (lsp, diagnostics and automatic formatting on save) and `vim-fugitive` (git workflow inside vim).
Why use ale? Because it works with vim8 and doesn't require any other dependencies like nodejs or python. I have reviewed the code and I'm happy with it. Install it and use it, don't update it without a reason.
Why vim-fugitive? It's a productivity booster. You install it once and forget about it. Tim Pope is the man.
I don't automatically load plugins (besides tmux-navigator) for a few reasons. Most of the time when I'm using vim it's for quick editing where I don't need the heavy tooling (like git integration or an lsp). If I am working on a project with a long term session I will enable git and lsp.
There's no need to automatically run code unless you need it.
Helix's editing model is better.
I've tried for 2-3 months and I had no problems with the editing model. My main issues were with the general UX (text moving around with diagnostics, balloon windows covering your input, etc). That's in addition to my other issues (you need to install it, it's not available everywhere, etc).
For people who use helix and want a TUI, why choose this over neovim? I like the defaults in helix until I don't, and then have to change stuff.
For people who use helix and want the full IDE experience, why not Zed, or maye even VSC/JetBraind IDE (come to think of it, how's fleet doing?).
If i need something simple I fall back to nvim, and if I'm missing features I sometimes boot up WebStorm (or if a colleague wants to navigate through something)
As someone who spent some time over the last few years working through trying to daily drive neovim, helix, emacs, and nano, the out of the box experience with helix is far and away the best experience of them. The defaults are very well chosen. Additionally the contextual help and hints are very good for helping you use and remember commands you don't use often. I also personally found that helix's order of operations for commands to make a lot more sense to my brain compared to vim's.
Part of it for me is that I really don't like the massive plugin / config wall that is the modern neovim/spacemacs experience. I truly appreciate the extensibility and the fact that those plugins allow for things helix just can't do right now (e.g. emacs is effectively the IDE for any lisp language and you can't load up a repl in helix). But the problem with that becomes not only do I need to learn the application itself, but now I need to learn a whole bunch of plugins, and often learn about the differences between them because everyone has their own preferences in combinations, so looking up how to do something covered by a plugin often leads you to multiple incompatible answers. And even if you bite the bullet on trying to build your own config from scratch (which I did with emacs) you're still often just taking on faith other people's recommendations on stuff, or spending a lot of time learning about a plugin to make a decision and that time is time you're not spending on whatever you want to be doing.
Helix benefits from being new and not carrying generations of legacy decisions behind it. As a result, helix can make decisions and defaults that fit "modern" expectations. It's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but it's also probably what I would recommend for someone "new to the TUI" as a place to start when you just need something with a good chunk of modern conveniences and don't want to spend the next few weeks getting the editor configured.
I do a ton of work on low-power devices over SSH. Helix launches almost instantly; neovim with a similar level of functionality (via plugins) has considerably more startup lag and considerably more maintenance cost (config / plugin updates). I also know enough rust to try to help fix bugs but don't know any C family languages; I have a strong preference to use open-source projects written in languages I know.
EDIT: for context I'm a hobbyist who use n/vim for 12 years or so before switching to helix for the last couple of years. There are several things about nvim behavior that I still miss quite a bit and still feel more natural, but the instant startup of helix vs a second or two for nvim configured to a similar level of functional makes it totally worthwhile for me.
1. hx is fast to start, and fast to use, it looks pretty too 2. the defaults are pretty good, i added a few bits and bobs, but customizing hx is not a way of life for me. emacs and neovim had me stuck in endless improvement loops... 3. tui works great on remote servers, it is nice to have the same setup on my mac, linux, and server. sure other editors does that too but also hx. 4. i got all the lsp i need. arguably getting my languages.toml setup was more fiddly than I wanted. In practice I found getting the setup right on other editors also was a bit of a chrore though.
I suspect editor choices are not super rational. A lot of it comes down to what feels right, new, exciting, engaging, and not so much what is theoretically optimal.
I really like the great defaults helix comes with.
I used neovim for 20 years and still like it a lot. But after some plugins broke I wanted to give helix a try. I am missing a plugin system in helix.
However, for me, helix comes with the nearly perfect amount of functionality, while being extremely responsive. It also made me appreciate stuff like multicursor, which I haven’t tried before.
I tried multiple out of the box nvim solutions, but never liked one of those.
I looked into zed, but don’t see much of a reason to use it. Maybe I should give it a try.
Personally, I don't like the idea of maintaining 500+ lines of config with tens of plugins. Setting up neovim from scratch is pretty tedious. Using something like lazyvim sets up 50 plugins, which are updated by simply taking the most recent commits from respective git repositories.
It’s only a matter of time before someone deploys something malicious to one of those 50 plugins.
Language support in JetBrains IDEs is top-notch, but they consume a lot of resources and do not work well for remote development in my experience. I still open them from time to time to do complex refactoring. Also, I just hate the idea of opening Goland, RustRover, and PyCharm at the same time. I have a monorepo at work with multiple languages.
How do people get such large config files? I have been using vim for 20 years and my config has grown to 33 lines, 8 of which are blank or comments. I probably use a dozen plugins, which typically add between 0 and 2 lines of config each (syntastic being an outlier, making up fully half of my non-blank lines)
Most people have to work with multiple languages, each of them takes around 20 lines, and blanks + comments add up as well.
I prefer the simple config and the selection-first editing model (best writing on this: https://kakoune.org/why-kakoune/why-kakoune.html). After talking to other Vim users who had a hard time adjusting to Helix, I think I must have used Vim in a pretty Helix-like way to begin with — selecting first. I never could get used to vim motions where the target text is not visualized.
Hx is batteries included. Nvim requires installing lots of plugins that do not inspire confidence - descriptions ridden with emojis, impossible to know who maintains what. Too many vectors leading to possible compromise.
Speaking to the second point, it's clear that some folks will avoid quitting the terminal at all costs. I could very well be one of them. :-D
Nice! I didn't know about:
:reset-diff-change
git checkout -p
I still prefer Neovim but I'm glad to see Helix getting some love recently. Hopefully it continues to do well.
Last I checked they still don't have a plugin system., I bet they'll see a jump in popularity when that gets going.
I think the plugin system is close, the author is just busy with other things before doing the final push to get it merged.
For those looking beyond Helix, Kakoune and Neovim, Vis is a lightweight and elegant option, worth a look.
Interesting. What happens when you open a file in the yazi pop-up? Does it create a buffer in Helix?
I'm not sure OP configured it this way, but it's possible. For example, yazelix gives you that functionality.
I do it using `nvim --server`, but not sure Helix can do it. https://neovim.io/doc/user/remote.html
I'm really not well experience in Vim vs Helix, but could one say that Helix is more like if Vim was in visual mode by default, and stayed in it even after an action?
And so, could (Neo)Vim be configured to work more like Helix?
Still haven't found a way to delete the current line in Helix (even if the current line is blank; "xd" will delete the current non-empty line, but will delete two lines if the current line is empty).
Annoying, isn't it? I am running a trivial fork to change the `x` behavior on an empty line.
x Select current line, if already selected, extend to next line extend_line_below
X Extend selection to line bounds (line-wise selection)
Interesting that every time Helix comes up, someone just has to mention Neovim. You never see Emacs or Helix users do that the other way around. Almost as if they’re personally offended.
Isn’t the reason more benign.
Neovim exist to improve upon concepts in Vim (easier plugin development with Lua).
Helix exists to improve upon concepts in Neovim (need for less plugins, more out of box functionality).
Not that surprising to be honest.
Helix is more similar to Neovim than Emacs and Helix is newer and less popular than Neovim, so people are predictably curious on why they should choose Helix over Neovim.
Vin/Neovim is one of the most popular editors in the world, Emacs and Helix are far from that.