Mitos editor is a fork of Helix(mitos.computer) |
Mitos editor is a fork of Helix(mitos.computer) |
One thing that really sticks out to me and gives me a feeling I won't consider to use Mitos, is the presentation further down on Mitos' front page of rendering of image files inside the terminal emulator. I rather that an image viewing program be opened, maybe called with options to not display interface widgets, and to be displayed in a new window tab. I use i3 or Sway, so I already have macros that do just this, and I don't fail to appreciate that others have this luxury (or not).
Alternative branches, or even forks like this are a good thing. Sometimes these help reach new consensus and merge back into the original project making the new project stronger, provided the original reason for a fork wasn't really issues of conflicting personalities.
I think a fork of Helix can be a step in the right direction. But "view images inside the terminal" doesn't pass the smell test. The mindset of displaying images inside of a terminal window and the macOS window decorations in the example screenshots, those two things together are part and parcel.
The last release was in July 2025
The project has had hundreds of commits (incl major features) since that last release.
And even though abstractly I like helix's keyboard model better than vim, I wish there was a way to just switch to vim mode because it is too ingrained.
Maybe this fork can address some of this either directly or by allowing plugins.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HelixEditor/comments/1wpt22a/mitos_...
That said, fwiw, I haven't felt the need for anything on it and it feels "complete" to me as far as my daily use goes
Maintaining OSS is tough, do you know what the community has been wanting lately that it lacks? Maybe I'm an outlier user or I don't know what I don't know
https://youtu.be/eX1ZhXY0VZU?si=hUufOFS5ifTGeh-g
If you're looking for something like that I'd love if you could take it for a spin:
https://github.com/helix-editor/helix/pull/8675
Helix was originally meant to be a "batteries included" editor without any scripting/plugins. That PR intends to change this and so there is a bit of controversy around it. Overall it looks like the PR will eventually be merged.
The Mitos fork could have be made for totally unrelated reasons. This is really just my speculation.
I don't have anything against Nano, but for something I use every day, I'd really miss go-to-definition, and being able to jump between sections of text quickly.
I prefer a TUI to a heavy Electron app, don't get me wrong. But Helix (& Mitos!) seem like a baffling choice compared to Sublime Text. Not worse: I literally don't understand the appeal.
I'm not saying it's insurmountable, but I don't think it's accurate to call it "trivial". There are comments on this thread mentioning that Helix hasn't released in a while but that it's relatively straightforward to build from source; I'm not confident that would be easy to preserve for a full GUI.
If I were to build an editor, I’d want the GUI platform-native so would probably go straight for Xcode and Swift.
If I had a strong aversion to Swift, I might consider a hybrid design where the UI is Swift and write a backend in a modern, fast language I prefer (Go/Rust/C# come to mind, but this isn’t a call-to-arms in the language wars). I believe this could be achieved since LSP works well as a backend server supplying IDE-level niceties, so I could keep most functionality implementations there. I’d have to have a strong reason though since Swift is a fine language, and AI does much of the writing now.
Then again, most devs live on a Mac and deploy to Linux, and are increasingly using Agents which may be better off cloud-hosted or at least sandboxed, so lightweight Swift UI and most logic in a headless cli app could be an interesting design choice.
But the important part to me would be low-bloat and native UI, and I’ve never found cross-platform UI frameworks to hold up in practice — even if only because different OSes necessarily have different ideas of idiomatic design, so you’d either be using least common denominator UI components that feel uncanny, or reimplementing the UI for each platform.
Have you found a language / framework combo that’s fast, fits into the OS well, and is _fun_ to write and use? Or is your idea that separate implementations are now so low cost — who cares — let the AI maintain them?
Legitimately asking in good faith, so please don’t interpret anything as snippy in there — it’s just my understanding of the state of the world. I’d genuinely love to learn about how cross-platform options have expanded if I’m missing something!
With absolutely no hard data to back this claim, my instinct is that a library would be even better. Anything you can manage to fit into a library can be much more easily tested, and then you can define whatever frontends you want (CLI, SwiftUI, etc.) that wrap it, and even leave the door open for people to implement whatever UI they might want.
BTW, if you compile helix from the main branch, source code indentation will be broken.
I believe I’ve heard many users requesting a plug-in system (there were some plans for Scheme?), and that the devs themselves considered many features as more appropriate for plugins than first-party support (code folding and non-LSP snippets, if I recall correctly?). I don’t know how Helix developed the last couple of years, but if features like that didn’t materialize yet, that sounds like sufficient impetus for a fork to me.
Pardon the snark, but they literally wrote an article [1] about giving up on code reviews because they push 30k _changes_ (I assume that means commits, but they don’t clarify), and were bottlenecked on reviews.
Instead, they claim to just review the _intent_ of the PR and presume correctness will be caught by more AI.
To me, the more absurd part is that they’re pushing that much code.
To put it in perspective:
Software # Commits Equiv. Time
--—----- --------- -----------
Nginx 8,758 7h
uv 11,081 9h
Vim 24,608 20h
Go 67,914 2.3d
Git 82,513 2.8d
VS Code 168,140 5.6d
Emacs 183,611 6.1d
Rust 343,063 11.4d
* Equiv time equals the amount of time it would take Anthropic to push that many commits, given their 30k changes/day estimate provided in the article linked below.It generated some interesting discussions here on hacker news [2] [3].
1: https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/redesigning-source-con...
2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50073633
3: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50118863
FYI: The last is a blog post at simonwilliamson.net about the source post, which was flagged appropriately, but I left since it had a few dozen comments as well.