cloudmacs VS org-parser

Things to note: - This is a very self-hosted type of method. You can store your notes in the cloud of course, but there's no "online Emacs" (whelp, nevermind, I stand corrected). - This is a very text-based environment. There are images and whatnot, but Emacs is fundamentally a bunch of text. This is a powerful thing, don't think of it as a downside. Text is the universal interface. - This is going to be a learning experience, both about a new tool and about yourself. You should walk away from Emacs with philosophical questions and a desire to convert the nonbelievers. - You will never feel comfortable using a normal computer again once you experience the pure bliss of a computing environment made just for you. - Do youself a favor and start with David Wilson's Emacs From Scratch series. If you follow that series all the way through, and make your own choices instead of just copying him, you'll be hooked by the end of it. DO NOT try to use Emacs raw and uncustomized, and shame anyone who tells you that you should. - You should look into keybindings, ergonomics, and human physiology (especially about hands). Regular computer stuff with a regular keyboard is hell on your hands, and Emacs will make it worse if you let it force it's arcane keybinds on you. Just define your own keybinds that work for you. Bonus points if you end up with a layered split vertical ortholinear concave thumb-cluster keyboard (I aint there yet because money, but I will eventually build my own custom keyboard).

If the goal is to have org mode running in a browser (even without wasm), then you could look at something like this: https://beepb00p.xyz/cloudmacs.html

In that last point there is Cloudmacs, which essentially runs spacemacs I'm docker and accessible via ssh within a browser.

Just kidding, you could try Cloudmacs. No idea how well it works with newer Emacs.

Maybe https://github.com/karlicoss/cloudmacs is what you're looking for?

https://beepb00p.xyz/cloudmacs.html (Not tried myself)

Interesting side thought, there's also a Docker container for a browser-usable emacs that works by using gotty to render a tty (and the emacs running on it) in a webpage. So you could in theory have a container with both that and OCaml+opam, which would let you tuareg-mode, merlin, and the OCaml interactive mode within this browser-based emacs.

This reminds me of cloudmacs

Let me start by saying I like the goal and would like to see org mode accessible to everyone, but I do have some thoughts/reservations.

> For the little code I do write, I find having AI assistance (via CoPilot or Cody) to be tremendously helpful. So helpful, in fact, that I now tend to jump into VSCode for actual coding,

Aren't there both copilot and Cody plugins available in emacs?

> Use VSCode for everything. For me, this requires a full-featured org mode implementation. I currently feel stuck in Emacs just because of how great org mode is.

This seems much more difficult than creating plugins you need in emacs and with the downside that customization will be much worse in vscode, especially customization of behavior with things like hooks.

> Letting go of bug-for-bug compatibility with Emacs as a goal. Let's let the quirky behavior die off and move forward with a more cohesive program, even if it looks a little bit different.

If you don't have compatibility, then you aren't really implementing org-mode... you are starting fresh.

That's okay, but you'll likely annoy org-mode users and developers as documents ending in `.org` start not working the same.

Also there are languages besides Rust and Haskell that have an org parser implementation. For instance one written in Javascript already has a spec as you explain it and is used in production for organice[0]:

> Why is this project useful / Rationale

> Org mode in Emacs is implemented in org-element.el (API documentation). The spec for the Org syntax is written in prose. - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser

> Portable. It should not be difficult to get this integrated into any editor.

This tells me you already have a language in mind such as Lua (can't think of any other easy to integrate languages)? I'd argue that's not very popular either though.

0: https://organice.200ok.ch/

I mean , you have parsers for JS and CLJS https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser

I don't think you did. You probably used the sister project https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser which has a well known issue regarding what you are describing: https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/issues/56

organice has no such performance issues (and does not run on the JVM). I use it daily with 5k LOC files.

EBNF grammar - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...

From the readme:

> Org grammar for tree-sitter. It is not meant to implement emacs' orgmode parser, but to implement a grammar that can usefully parse org files to be used in neovim and any library that uses tree-sitter parsers.

This grammar is in active development and is being used by nvim-orgmode/orgmode [1], a org-mode neovim plugin.

Some additional resources some might find useful:

* Org Syntax - https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html

* EBNF grammar - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...

[1] https://github.com/nvim-orgmode/orgmode

There's at least a parser using that as a spec at https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser

We have an issue with more information and we are working on it: https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/issues/56

If you’re open to use a different Lisp, then maybe https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser is something for you.

I just wanted to chime in and mention that the folks who wrote organice[0] also came up with an EBNF grammar[1] for org-mode. Also of tangential interest is that work is actively being done on creating a tree-sitter version[2] of the grammar, although that work is not public (yet).

[0] https://github.com/200ok-ch/organice

[1] https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...

[2] https://github.com/kristijanhusak/orgmode.nvim/issues/31#iss...