multiple-cursors.el VS doom-emacs

You'll need to install an extension for it, but yes it does. Here is one example: https://github.com/magnars/multiple-cursors.el

For me, the beauty of Beancount[0] is that it's just text files in Git. There's a web UI I use for generating reports, and a Python API with which I hacked together some import/export scripts, but 99% of my interactions with it are via Emacs[1] and Magit.

A ton of repetitive bookkeeping tasks become so much easier when you can copy and paste, or use keyboard macros or something like multiple-cursors[2], rather than have to click tens or hundreds of times in a GUI. Many years ago I used QuickBooks, and basic tasks like importing a bank statement took at least an order of magnitude longer than they do now.

Having my company's books in Git is also huge when it comes to auditing, concurrency, backups, and figuring out where things went wrong when accounts don't balance. As mentioned in another comment: `git diff` is a really powerful tool and it's awesome to be able to check out the books as they existed at a particular point in time. `git blame` is great for when things don't balance. Writing meaningful commit messages and comments keeps me sane when I try to remember a year later why something is recorded the way it is.

The biggest downside—or advantage, depending on how you look at it—is that there's no default or built-in chart of accounts, so you need a certain level of accounting acumen (or professional advice) to set things up at first. I'm pretty sure GnuCash aims to be more plug-and-play, whereas Beancount is more akin to a programming library that you use to build an accounting system that works for you. I agree with the grandparent commenter, who said that text-based accounting is "the best and most flexible accounting experience I've ever had." But the cost of that flexibility is that a certain level of base knowledge is a prerequisite.

[0]: https://beancount.io/

[1]: https://github.com/beancount/beancount-mode

[2]: https://github.com/magnars/multiple-cursors.el

The original multiple cursors package is amazing for what it is, but it scales very badly. Emacs is efficient when editing at one place at a time (as you'd do normally), and when mc replicates all the edits character-by-character for all the cursors, it does the very opposite of this: many edits all in very different places. It works quite well when using just a few cursors, but going above a dozen of them causes them to be visibly sluggish.

Recently multiple-cursors has been unusable for me on Emacs 29.0.60 (not a release yet). Movements (and possibly other operations) don't work with the following error:

If you intend to use Emacs for this (as opposed to some external script), you're probably better off using the keyboard macros or a regular search&replace instead of multiple cursors (I assume the Magnars flavor of them). As flexible as they are, they don't scale well and they get exponentially slower the more cursors you have. Having 2500 cursors sounds insane.

You can do something similar with multiple cursors.

Then, in *rg* buffer, we transform org-link-expand-abbrev into org-link-RENAMED the way we prefer (we have all the Emacs power, some of us might use query-replace, other might use multiple-cursors.el, other iedit, etc.). And so *rg* buffer looks like this:

There is also multiple-cursors.el, which looks the closest to what you want, but it's also the buggiest.

$ rm -rf ~/.config/emacs # Remove the existing directory if necessary git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs ~/.config/emacs ~/.config/emacs/bin/doom install

Sounds like what you want is emacs, but preconfigured. In that case, have you tried Doom Emacs, Spacemacs or any of the myriad of others like those?

darren@pop-os:~$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs ~/.emacs.d Cloning into '/home/darren/.emacs.d'... remote: Enumerating objects: 1156, done. remote: Counting objects: 100% (1156/1156), done. remote: Compressing objects: 100% (1042/1042), done. remote: Total 1156 (delta 85), reused 650 (delta 71), pack-reused 0 Receiving objects: 100% (1156/1156), 1.13 MiB | 7.29 MiB/s, done. Resolving deltas: 100% (85/85), done.

I used to do something like -{ nixosConfig, config, lib, pkgs, ... }: -let - xdgConfig = config.xdg.configHome; -in { - home.activation = { - foo = lib.hm.dag.entryAfter [ "writeBoundary" ] '' - doomdir="${xdgConfig}/doom"; - # $VERBOSE_ARG - if [ -d "$doomdir" ]; then - $DRY_RUN_CMD git -C "$doomdir" pull http master || true - else - # git clone and change url - http="https://git." - $DRY_RUN_CMD git clone "$http" "$doomdir" - # the new url needs ssh keys setup - git -C "$doomdir" remote add http "$http" - git -C "$doomdir" remote set-url origin "gitea@git." - fi - emacsdir="${xdgConfig}/emacs" - if [ -d "$emacsdir" ]; then - if [ -d "$emacsdir/.local" ]; then - $DRY_RUN_CMD $emacsdir/bin/doom sync - fi - else - $DRY_RUN_CMD git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs "$emacsdir" - fi - ''; - }; -}

`;; Needed to add javascript-eslint to the the next-checker after lsp so that it would actually load, as that wasn’t happening by deafult ;; also needed to runit after the lsp-afer-initalize-hook because otherwise ‘lsp wasn’t a valid checker (add-hook ‘lsp-after-initialize-hook (lambda () (flycheck-add-next-checker ‘lsp ‘javascript-eslint))) ;; https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs/issues/1530 ;; Potential alternative to the above ;; (after! (:and lsp-mode flycheck) ;; (flycheck-add-next-checker ‘lsp ‘javascript-eslint))

The performance lag of Spacemacs was addressed by Doom Emacs ( https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs ). Have you tried Doom Emacs by any chance. After syncing everything, the performance is stellar in my opinion.

but I just realized, you're probably better off using doom emacs. The defaults are sane, customizations are almost always optional and the community's really active/helpful. (Disclaimer: I'm a doom emacs user with ~2k lines of config)

While Doom is more opinionated, it's not too difficult make Emacs your own, most of the choices are optimized anyway. Currently the head of Spacemacs devs is not active on the project anymore. Also I don't think it's hard to upstream code to Doom, as long as the code is thoroughly written, take a similar example on both sides: the introduction of a completion engine as layer/module (same packages are installed): - https://github.com/syl20bnr/spacemacs/pull/14901: 23 comments, 7 participants - https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs/pull/4664: 576 comments, 20 participants

Also Doom emacs has one. https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs/tree/master/modules/lang/common-lisp

Nowadays, I use https://github.com/hlissner/doom-emacs with WSL2 but only for org-mode. For code, I have either Sublime Text or VS Code.