Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Workman Layout for Vim

axiomatic.neophilus.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#51

Post by eviks »

johncoltrane wrote: post #49
eviks wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In reality there is very little meaning, there is just this false sense there is that keep all these bad defaults in place. Like, is it word forward or word backwards? W doesn't tell you. So if you're used to qwerty W it makes perfect sense to keep the much stronger muscle memory intact when switching layouts and use non-W in the same spot

Single-letter commands have a clear meaning once you have learned enough of Vim. https://stackoverflow.com/a/7411851/546861 > Like, is it word forward or word backwards? W doesn't tell you. W doesn't have to tell you anything. W being the reverse of w is a grammar rule that is supposed to be learned and internalized, like the other grammar rules (count, etc.). > So if you're used to qwerty W it makes perfect sense to…

The clear meaning of "h only makes sense on the keyboard used by vi's author" is that it's meaningless for everyone but the vi's author. And "once you've learned enough" is self-fulfilling for any set

W is not the reverse of w in my comment once you read that it's about direction

And it makes no sense to go through the great pain of retraining when you can't explain the benefit

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#52

Post by eviks »

eimrine wrote: post #46
eviks wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still doesn't, the forward looking part is misapplied for movements where you have both directions in separate keys (this principle could work for ops similar to tT (forward by default, backward shifted)), just like you can't explain why B is moving backwards by Words, not characters or something else (is there another important context you need to know that "vim is word looking by default"?). Or why it's not Below t…

> you can't explain why B is moving backwards by Words, not characters or something else (is there another important context you need to know that "vim is word looking by default"?). Yes, there is some concept inside of this. Some commands are singular such as zz , some are paired (allmost all), some are double-paired, and only one set of commands is triple-paired, this is the list: w W b B e E ge gE Take care to fin…

I took care, found the logic seriously flawed, explained some of the reasons above. Take care to address the substance, please

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#53

Post by alwayslikethis »

ndeast wrote: 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…

I learned colemak a long time ago, and progressed just like you, except I didn't try to retain qwerty speed. I figured I can look at the key legends anyways. I initially reached about 50-60 wpm but after that the speed still seems to progress slowly. Now after several years I can type about 100 wpm which I was never able to on qwerty, and I didn't do any significant practice on typing speed.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#54

Post by alwayslikethis »

willbush wrote: post #23
ndeast wrote: 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,…

I don't rebind my keys on Colemak for vim/evil. I got used to it pretty quickly. Beyond the basic hjkl movement commands I don't think anything is really meant for qwerty specifically. Remapping also breaks the mnemonics somewhat which I think is important. Emacs users got along just fine with Ctrl-n and p, so I see no specific reason remapping should be needed.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#55

Post by alwayslikethis »

lyall wrote: 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.

I agree. I quickly started to associate the commands with the letters, rather than the key locations. hjkl you can get used to after a while.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#56

Post by eimrine »

eviks wrote: post #52
eimrine wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you can't explain why B is moving backwards by Words, not characters or something else (is there another important context you need to know that "vim is word looking by default"?). Yes, there is some concept inside of this. Some commands are singular such as zz , some are paired (allmost all), some are double-paired, and only one set of commands is triple-paired, this is the list: w W b B e E ge gE Take care to fin…

I took care, found the logic seriously flawed, explained some of the reasons above. Take care to address the substance, please

I don't see your attempts to understand the logic I have written. Why don't to RTFM what is the connection between the 8 commands I have provided?

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#57

Post by lawn »

eviks wrote: post #50
lawn wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you could apply a different meaning to a character doesn't change the fact that some meaning, once learned, is more helpful than only relying on physical positions. Combining meaning with a physical position is even more superior than purely relying on one approach. And to me, it was far easier to switch layout while relying on mnemonics than on key position, and this continues to be true even when I add…

> Just because you could apply a different meaning to a character doesn't change the fact that some meaning, once learned, is more helpful than only relying on physical positions. It does precisely that - because "once learned" muscle memory / spatial orientation would beat your conscious efforts to map ambiguous semantic rules every time since they're more common/primitive/intuitive ("move finger up to move up") > A…

I feel like you're almost being deliberately obtuse when you're ignoring the context that it's about learning the movements in the first place.

This isn't productive in any way.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#58

Post by eimrine »

linsomniac wrote: post #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…

> because I think slower than I type...

Do not confuse throughput with ping and not using visual cortex vs using visual cortex.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#59

Post by eimrine »

linsomniac wrote: post #5
johncoltrane wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^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.

How do vertical tab and form feed relate to "up" and "right"?

I would like to suppose this is what Home and End does on any modern keyboard.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#60

Post by eimrine »

teo_zero wrote: post #28
jacknews wrote: post #10

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...

This is made for accounting people, they use to type on numpad with their right hand and ctrl -a -x -c -v with their left one for whole day.
Post reply on HN