Ooh, what motivated you to choose Void Linux? I know there's a bit of a battle going on over whether systemd is a good idea, do you have an opinion on this? (I don't, because I know next to nothing about operating system design). I would post my desktop but it's really really boring. I use vanilla i3 on Arch Linux on my laptop, with the default window decorations and a black background. My work computer uses the same thing but with custom window decoration colours and the default Ubuntu background because I haven't got round to customising it yet. One thing I can recommend however is Spacemacs, which is a set of extensions for Emacs to give it Vim keybindings (evil mode) plus loads and loads of extras. It's really just a collection of Emacs addons, plus some nice config files for managing sets of addons (called 'layers'). All I can say is that it offers a lot of nice defaults and builtins. I use this at work. What code have you been writing?
I picked Void mostly in an attempt to get away from systemd. In my opinion, systemd suffers from severe feature creep. For the most part I'd like the software that I use to follow the unix philosophy. As for why I chose Void over other distros that don't use systemd, it's partially because it uses runit as its init and also because I like its xbps package manager. Overall, it's pretty similar to running arch. It's got the rolling release and the minimal base system. You know, I could never get into emacs. I think it really has more than is necessary for a text editor. To be honest, I would use ed if it had syntax highlighting. I haven't been writing much recently, other than stuff for class. The code in the screenshot is from when I read Build Your Own Lisp a year ago. It just happened to be the most decent looking C code in my projects folder.
That's interesting, also kinda cool that packages are added to the repo via pull request. Emacs has a bit of a learning curve, I don't think I would have ever changed to it except as an act of procrastination. There's a guy at work who is always telling me "you know, you can just do that with a key command", which just boggles my mind. One day I'm going to trawl through the keybindings/Lisp files and see how it all works. One day. I hope class is going well.
I don't buy technical books much because I'm an autodidact. I did buy Mastering Emacs though, even after using emacs for a long time. It's an excellent way to really appreciate emacs.
Emacs isn't really a text editor, it's a LISP virtual machine with lots of primitives for manipulating text and buffers. Probably the most extendable and configurable software for end users. That's why it has so many incredibly diverse packages. I wish I had spent time getting to know vim, but there's no way I'm switching now. You know, I could never get into emacs. I think it really has more than is necessary for a text editor.
I'm impure I guess, I use both. vim for configuration files and C/python/other algol-type languages/SQL/shell scripts and html/javascript/css polyglots, emacs for lisp/ml-family languages/prolog family languages/TeX/postscript. emacs doesn't really shine on languages with gross grammars, it's easier just to use a dumb editor, but it's a delight when commands like forward/backward-sexp can do something sane.
I use Emacs for text, but my windowing is split between Emacs and Tmux. I'm trying to migrate to Tmux. IMO the real options are, Vim is your editor and POSIX is your IDE, or Emacs is your editor and IDE. I'm trying to migrate to POSIX as IDE. But I really like Emacs' chording and modeless buffers-and-minibuffers model. So, I think my eventual goal is POSIX/Tmux with Vimacs as the editor. With scripts in Lua. Vimscript is nasteh.
I don't think emacs really deserves its reputation of trying to be your whole world. It is happy to work the the tools the rest of the environment provides. shell-command-on-region is handy if you have some text you want to transform and can see how to do it with awk or some other external tool more easily than with elisp, for example.