Live data from Hacker News

Workman Layout for Vim

axiomatic.neophilus.net

21–30 of 71 posts

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#21
post #19

In my experience as a Colemak typist and heavy vim (or vim-emulation) user, the best solution is to bite the bullet and _not_ remap any of the keys. This is obviously annoying for hjkl navigation at first but you get used to it pretty quickly. Plus there's the added benefit of being able to easily use hjkl for navigation everywhere that uses them but _doesn't_ let you remap, which is a lot of places.

Yes. As a dvorak typist, hjkl being in eccentric locations hasn't bothered me.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#22
For the longest time I wanted to learn another keyboard layout, in the 80s and 90s it was Dvorak, but vi motion keys kept me from doing it. I didn't like any of the solutions (remap, switch to qwerty for command mode, whatever)... But I always felt like I was "leaving money on the table" by not learning something better.

I've decided somewhat recently that I'm just fine with qwerty, any money that I'm leaving on the table is probably fairly small because I think slower than I type...

Some of that change in perspective may have been a coworker who used Dvorak, and watching that dude type was a seriously painful experience.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#23
post #17

Last year during a couple month break I had between jobs I decided I would learn a new keyboard layout as it was something I always wanted to do, but never wanted to commit to the learning process while I still needed to be proficient at typing. I chose to learn Colemak-DH [0]. Before learning I was around a 75-80 WPM Qwerty touch typist. I went all in and did a lot of heavy practice. It took me around a week to be a…

Your story is similar to mine. I also use Colemak-DH. However, I sort of quit Qwerty cold turkey. I also used to touch type about 80 wpm on Qwerty, and because I didn't maintain it or practice while learning Colemak, I completely overwrote my muscle memory. Overall, the layout is more comfortable for me, but hard to justify especially if you rather not tamper with default keybindings.

I'm also a vim keybinding user, but in Emacs evil-mode mostly. Vim keybindings are definitely made for qwerty, and to me not rebinding the keys just seemed insane.

I ended up spending a weekend, reviewed all the keybindings I use, and ones I should probably use more, then wrote it all out [0].

I remapped a lot of keys back to their qwerty positions, but I also took the opportunity to make some changes that I thought would be more ergonomic. I also came up with me own mnemonic system for the re-mappings.

For example:

  | function          | before | after | new mnemonic      | Commentary                                 |
  |-------------------+--------+-------+-------------------+--------------------------------------------|
  | find file at pt   | g f    | g s   | search file at pt | need to free up `g f'                      |
  | find file.. w/ ln | g F    | g S   | search file.. etc | need to free up `g F'                      |
  | end WORD          | E      | F     | far WORD          | foot/forward are other possible mnemonics  |
  | end WORD          | g E    | g F   | far WORD rev      | foot/forward are other possible mnemonics  |
  | end word          | e      | f     | far word          |                                            |
  | end word          | g e    | g f   | far word rev      |                                            |
  | find              | f      | s     | search            | right next to till :)                      |
  | rev find          | F      | S     | rev search        |                                            |
  | visual mode       | v      | r     | range             | see note below                             |
  | visual lines      | V      | R     | range lines       |                                            |
  | visual block      | C-v    | C-r   | range block       |                                            |
  | visual restore    | g v    | g r   | range restore     |                                            |
  | replace           | r      | v     | revise            | convert is another possible mnemonic       |
  | replace mode      | R      | V     | revise mode       |                                            |
  | goto mk           | `      | j     | jump              | easier to reach and now mnemonic           |
  | goto mk ln        | '      | J     | jump to line      | same key as j now, which makes sense to me |
Here is a minimal vim config [1] that I use if I find myself wanting to use (neo)vim. My evil-mode config [2] in Emacs. Remapping `less` keys [3].

[0] https://github.com/willbush/system/tree/main/configs/keyboar...

[1] https://github.com/willbush/system/blob/main/configs/nvim/in...

[2] https://github.com/willbush/system/blob/82253534b92f3ab87d8e...

[3] https://github.com/willbush/system/blob/82253534b92f3ab87d8e...

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#24
post #6

This[1] links to http://www . workmanlayout.com/blog/ which is a 404. (space inserted to avoid auto link generation). Going to the main page of that site reveals some articles from the past few years, but also has online casino and crypto links disguised as posts. E.g.: > is your premier source for crypto insights, covering the latest news, trends, and guides on blockchain, cryptocurrencies, and cybersecurity. Whethe…

I touch typed qwerty for about 20 years using really bad technique(full left hand two fingers on right that roamed). When I got my first split keyboard I switched to Colemak and went through a bunch of touch typing tutorials to teach myself proper form. Without switching layouts I don't think I could have forced myself to start using proper form in qwerty.

Same as you. I switched to ColemakDH for a while and noticed that it improved my Qwerty typing speed.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#25

This makes no sense. It is _meaning_ that bounds certain Vim commands to certain keys, not the position of the keys on your keyboard. Moving the keys around doesn't change their meaning—"w" is still "w", for "word"—so making all those mappings is utterly pointless. Unless one uses a layout different from that of their physical keyboard, in which case WTF?

It's not all black or white. While most mappings are dictated by meaning, some are instead were chosen for their position, eg. hjkl, or relative position, eg. ? is the reverse of / just because in the US layout they are on the same key.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#26
First time hearing about this keyboard layout. I wonder how much marginal efficiency there is to be gained.

My hands' physical travels reduced by a lot ever since I learned vim. But I don't think optimizing fingers' travel would give as much boost in overall speed. On the other hand, though, you can argue that fingers travel between keys a lot more often than between keyboard and mouse.

What's everyone's experience? Was it worth it for you learning another layout?

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#27

First time hearing about this keyboard layout. I wonder how much marginal efficiency there is to be gained. My hands' physical travels reduced by a lot ever since I learned vim. But I don't think optimizing fingers' travel would give as much boost in overall speed. On the other hand, though, you can argue that fingers travel between keys a lot more often than between keyboard and mouse. What's everyone's experience?…

Of course it worth it, but coleman/workman are for weak ppl who can not get rid of qwerty completely.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#28

This is a problem with alternative layouts - you have to relearn or remap all the shortcuts for different apps as well as learn the new alphabet locations. Shortcuts sometimes use mnemonics, eg p to print or whatever, but they're often just in particular locations, like V for paste for example - it's just next to 'C' for cut - so if those two keys are separated on your new layout, it's confusing, and in any case, doe…

I think ctrl-x, ctrl-c, and ctrl-v should have never existed. So difficult to press, for such common operations! While we still have prominent keys for rarely used functions, such as capslock, insert, etc.

I have fond memories of those Sun keyboards with dedicated cut, copy and paste keys...

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the issue boils down to qwerty-hjkl become workman-yneo. hjkl don't have _meaning_, it's all about their specific location on the keyboard. So if yneo is now left/down/up/right, you now need to do something else for yank/next/end/open.

^H, ^J, ^K, and ^L _had_ meaning and that meaning is why hjkl do what they do. Their location on the homerow of a number of layouts is an accident. And they are not very useful in practice anyway. "Remapping" the whole keyboard around them is IMO a silly idea.

> ^H, ^J, ^K, and ^L _had_ meaning

I can parse only High and Low which is what ^H and ^L do.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#30
post #19

In my experience as a Colemak typist and heavy vim (or vim-emulation) user, the best solution is to bite the bullet and _not_ remap any of the keys. This is obviously annoying for hjkl navigation at first but you get used to it pretty quickly. Plus there's the added benefit of being able to easily use hjkl for navigation everywhere that uses them but _doesn't_ let you remap, which is a lot of places.

My solution has been putting important keys on a function layer so I can still reference them easily.
Post reply on HN