Just wondering: how would you characterize the general feel of the different nvim flavours: LazyVim, Chad, Astro, etc.? I’m not thinking functionality, which plugins are included, etc., but the way they feel when one uses them.
I tried out a whole bunch of them, as per Elijah Manor’s excellent video about config switching (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkHjJlSgKZY)
I figured out LazyVim is trying its best not to look and feel like vim, with modal windows and fancy graphics and all. I didn’t like that. I can’t remember why I left Astro behind, but I finally settled on Chad, which at first I disliked because of the name, but eventually I figured out that that was the flavour for me: so many things just worked as expected, and there were so many times when I looked up something, and went: “Hm! That was quite smart, actually!”
So that’s where I’m at – and purely for “feel” reasons. So: convince me: what am I missing when I don’t use bundle B or config C?
Not much. I don’t use any bundles myself and never have FOMO. I sometimes copy configurations from big projects like Chad and Lazy if I see a clever way they added in certain visual aspect (bufferline, statusbar etc.); one can also see their plugin list for ideas. I figure by doing it yourself, it’s easier to maintain and learn the plugin functions/keybindings that way. The approach I take is (1) learn default nvim -> (2) understand what each plugin adds to the default functionality -> (3) install and tweak what you need to create your own ecosystem. But maybe it’s a bit geeky and time consuming.
TL;DR: you’re not missing out much, check in with recent commits from different projects if you want to steal new ideas, or just hang around neovim communities.
I just switched from LunarVim to NvChad and it’s a nicer DX out of the box to me for frontend dev (convert from vscode). Though i find the lunarvim key mappings more intuitive.
The config paradigm in nvchad makes more sense to me than it does with lunarvim too.
Bit both are pretty cool 😎
