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

61–70 of 71 posts

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#61

Post by eviks »

eimrine wrote: post #56
eviks wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

But I do see how you fail to understand the failure of this logic, and me reading the manual again won't help you get it. So why don't you correct the assumption that you're the only one who reads manuals and try to think about the substance of the conversation?

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#62

Post by [deleted] »

lawn wrote: post #40
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…

> The other issue is that most of these alternate layouts are optimized for writing prose, and sometimes make other things, code, for example, more difficult. Why would it make writing code more difficult? Code is mostly just English plus punctuation, which most layouts don't change.

[deleted]

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#63

Post by eimrine »

eviks wrote: post #61
eimrine wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

But I do see how you fail to understand the failure of this logic, and me reading the manual again won't help you get it. So why don't you correct the assumption that you're the only one who reads manuals and try to think about the substance of the conversation?

Listen me apprentice. You gave us the question about why b command goes backwards while most of backwards commands are capitalized with an assumption that it has to contain some logic unknown by you. You have received the logic from me. What fucking else do you want from me?

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#64

Post by eviks »

eimrine wrote: post #63
eviks wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I do see how you fail to understand the failure of this logic, and me reading the manual again won't help you get it. So why don't you correct the assumption that you're the only one who reads manuals and try to think about the substance of the conversation?

Listen me apprentice. You gave us the question about why b command goes backwards while most of backwards commands are capitalized with an assumption that it has to contain some logic unknown by you. You have received the logic from me. What fucking else do you want from me?

No, my ignorant pseudo-master, you couldn't even understand my question before trying to shrowd your supposed answer in the mystery of a manual: it wasn't about capitalization, but object type.

So I've received nothing from you, bBwW doesn't cover it. And I don't want anything from you, it's pretty clear you can add nothing useful to this conversation with such a combination of arrogance and ignorance

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#65

Post by eimrine »

eviks wrote: post #64
eimrine wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Listen me apprentice. You gave us the question about why b command goes backwards while most of backwards commands are capitalized with an assumption that it has to contain some logic unknown by you. You have received the logic from me. What fucking else do you want from me?

No, my ignorant pseudo-master, you couldn't even understand my question before trying to shrowd your supposed answer in the mystery of a manual: it wasn't about capitalization, but object type. So I've received nothing from you, bBwW doesn't cover it. And I don't want anything from you, it's pretty clear you can add nothing useful to this conversation with such a combination of arrogance and ignorance

Well, your clarification did not help me to understand what you are looking for, try formulating your question once more. You just told me that your question is somewhere higher.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#66

Post by xigoi »

lawn wrote: post #40
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…

> The other issue is that most of these alternate layouts are optimized for writing prose, and sometimes make other things, code, for example, more difficult. Why would it make writing code more difficult? Code is mostly just English plus punctuation, which most layouts don't change.

Code uses much more punctuation than prose.

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#67

Post by lawn »

xigoi wrote: post #66
lawn wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The other issue is that most of these alternate layouts are optimized for writing prose, and sometimes make other things, code, for example, more difficult. Why would it make writing code more difficult? Code is mostly just English plus punctuation, which most layouts don't change.

Code uses much more punctuation than prose.

I'm well aware, I did some analysis of my coding when I designed my layout[0].

The point is that alternative layouts generally doesn't make it _worse_ than qwerty (maybe some weird esoteric ones might do, but the popular ones being discussed here are at worst equal to qwerty in that regard).

[0]: https://www.jonashietala.se/blog/2021/06/03/the-t-34-keyboar...

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#68

Post by teo_zero »

eviks wrote: post #37
teo_zero wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

What's th best alternative you've seen?

Ehm... Sun keyboards with dedicated cut, copy and paste keys?

Re: Workman Layout for Vim

#70

Post by lupire »

johncoltrane wrote: post #47
lupire wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. hjkl are arrow keys. https://catonmat.net/why-vim-uses-hjkl-as-arrow-keys

"hjkl are arrow keys" because the arrows are printed on them and the arrows are printed on hjkl because pressing ^H, ^J, ^K, and ^L is what moved the cursor on the screen of the ADM-3A.

Yes, and H, ^J, ^K, and ^L is what moved the cursor on the screen of the ADM-3A because they are on the home row.
Post reply on HN