Helix does not aim to be a better vim / neovim. Thus, for example, there are officially no vim bindings and Helix follows the selection → action model. Helix is also a relatively new project.
I am a fairly long time emacs user, used it as my primary editor and note taking app for around six years. I have a config large enough to warrant its own git repo separate from my normal dotfiles.
Before emacs I used vim for several years.
After really getting into Rust, I decided about three months ago to just take a look at helix and see what it was about… and I haven’t opened emacs or vim again since.
LSP and tree-sitter cover like 90% of what my old config was doing out of the box, and the kakoune inspired key bindings just felt so natural. I feel at home without the overhead of configuration paralysis.
Don’t get me wrong, helix has plenty of room to grow, but I’m excited to grow with it.
I recently gave it a try after seeing dessalines recommending it. It is pretty cool but years of vim muscle memory won’t go away so easily :D
In my opinion, users who already use vim are not the primary target audience of Helix. I see the target group more among users who want to switch from a “normal” editor to a modal editor. The selection → action model and the easier shortcuts probably make the switch easier for many. I personally don’t like vim at all because of the handling (purely subjective view). Helix will definitely not be my default editor but I get along much better with it than with vim or neovim.
When I first tried Helix, my main concern (that prevented me from getting too far into it) was not going from Vim to Helix, but the other way around. Vim (or sometimes vi) is a standard editor on almost any Linux machine, so if I am ever working on a server if a VM, I would need to know/use Vim keybinds. That made Vim a more useful tool for me to learn at the time, as I could use the skills both on my machine and anywhere else.
I don’t feel like this is true anymore. Many distros do not ship vi(m) anymore but only nano.