161–170 of 227 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My efficiency comes from planning, not counting keystrokes. As if the two are mutually exclusive...
One (planning) results in efficiency gains that are far more significant than the other.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My efficiency comes from planning, not counting keystrokes. As if the two are mutually exclusive...
One (planning) results in efficiency gains that are far more significant than the other.
Emphasis added.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you like programming with a thumb keyboard instead of a full-sized keyboard? That is how I feel typing in a text editor without a vi-like setting. The absence of vi style editing feels unnecessarily crippling. If you don't feel the same, then whatever; nobody is trying to force vi style editing on you. I don't see what your issue here is, why is it that you seem so intent on discrediting the experiences of othe…
> why is it that you seem so intent on discrediting the experiences of others? I think you are reading far too much into what I've commented. Nobody is doing that at all.
I don't know how this would work out ergonomically. My dad is a cab driver and he often complains that pressing the clutch with his foot often giving him RSI kind of pain. But however I think this is purely subjective. From an experiment perspective, this is really cool! And this generally qualifies into what could one call a 'real hack'. This has a air of freshness to it. Now the real power of vim is in getting into…
Wonderful articulation of what we're losing with the fashion moving towards low learning curve, expert-proof designs.
Now I can send that link to people instead of trying to articulate the same idea in my own words.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your first personal attack was subtle: "I understand that you like to click through your menus" Now you resort to calling me a troll? That's nice. There's nothing unfriendly about a helicopter cockpit. Even if you've only played with flight simulators anyone half-way intelligent can probably figure out most of it within a few minutes. Flying one is a different deal, as mastering and understanding the complex relation…
I've noticed that HN is particularly good among online forums about not squashing comments that go against tribal beliefs. Your first few comments, unlike this one, don't contain any justification whatsoever for your assertions. I don't downvote because somebody hates vim and it hurts my feelings. I downvote because somebody hates vim but doesn't feel like they need to justify why, they just want to say it. Often peo…
As for down-voting on HN. There's plenty of evidence that it is badly broken. It's funny to watch the Apple fan-boys down-vote on emotion when you even peripherally chafe their idols. The emotion is evident from the fact that substantive posts are down-voted when nothing is materially wrong or offensive about them.
Most of it is also what I call chicken-shit down-voting. No explanation and no reason given. You are accusing me for voicing a contrarian opinion without sufficient explanation. What about down-voting without any explanation whatsoever? I have only down-voted a post once and I went out of my way to explain why I did so. I believe I owe this much to someone if I am going to exercise that right. And so, that is my policy: If I down-vote I have to take the time to explain why. Otherwise I don't do it.
It is clear that the HN culture --at least the one exhibited on this thread-- is that vi/vim are fantastic. So be it. I don't have time to screw around with this topic any more and fend off fan-boy attacks. I suspect the same is true of your case.
I have used a myriad of tools over the years. The only use I have for vi/vim is when I have no choice but to use them. I remember when keyboards didn't even have function keys. In those days these kinds of tools made sense. Today? No. Not any more. You don't have to see it my way. And that's OK.
> they increase the ratio of work done to the amount of text-editing
I would challenge you to quantify that in the context of a real project, concept to completion. I would be willing to wager that vi/vim don't contribute one iota towards the completion of the project.
I have yet to do a project where anyone even remotely said: Wow, that text editor saved us hours of work.
That aspect of the adoration of vi/vim is what I see as ridiculous. I simply don't think that any of it is materially significant to the timeline of any non-trivial project.
Then again, I really don't care to continue on this thread because it truly is a waste of time for all involved. So we are done.
Conclusions:
1- No contrarian opinion of vi/vim will be tolerated by HN vi/vim users.
2- vi/vim are fantastic.
3- Anyone even remotely thinking of suggesting otherwise just doesn't get it.
I can live with that. No problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One (planning) results in efficiency gains that are far more significant than the other.
Yeah, but the efficiency gains are not mutually exclusive. Why would you think they are?
As an optimization problem, text editing is the wrong aspect of creating a software product to focus on.
Software projects are notorious for being way behind schedule. If the estimate is weeks, it might take months. If it is months, it might take a year or more. In that context, arguing that a text editor will make everyone more efficient is just silly. Get my damn project done on time BECAUSE you are using vi/vim and then I'll drink the cool-aid. Until that happens I will continue to believe that the use of vi/vim is just tribal behavior rather than these tools offering any real business value in the context of a project's timeline, maintainability, quality of code and bug density.
If you can point to a single project that was done on time and without bugs because it was edited on vi/vim then you have a point. I suspect that this is not the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've noticed that HN is particularly good among online forums about not squashing comments that go against tribal beliefs. Your first few comments, unlike this one, don't contain any justification whatsoever for your assertions. I don't downvote because somebody hates vim and it hurts my feelings. I downvote because somebody hates vim but doesn't feel like they need to justify why, they just want to say it. Often peo…
My very first comment gave some (superficial) explanations. I didn't think that I needed to write a small term paper to voice an opinion. As for down-voting on HN. There's plenty of evidence that it is badly broken. It's funny to watch the Apple fan-boys down-vote on emotion when you even peripherally chafe their idols. The emotion is evident from the fact that substantive posts are down-voted when nothing is materia…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't really answer the question, does it? The other poster made an assertion about VIM being more efficient. I would like to get a list from him (or her).
> I would like to get a list from him (or her). Why is an answer from sofal not acceptable?
Numbers. Not statements or links to the manual. I care about data. Show me a project that got done sooner and better because of the use of vi/vim and you'll have a point. I propose that not one person can make that claim and that the popularity of vi/vim are purely tribal.
There's an interesting show on TV called "Head Games" (http://news.discovery.com/human/new-tv-show-plays-head-games...).
In this show they demonstrate, among other things, how tribal behavior can be taken to an extreme. It is very hard for some to go against group behavior. They show one example of a guy in a room that stands up when everyone else stands up and he doesn't even know why.
To some extent I believe that some of these tools are like that. You work in a shop where the hot programmer swears by vi/vim and you adopt that without challenging any of it. Very soon everyone is playing the same tune, facts be damned. I happen to be one of those people that does not engage in crowd behavior. This can be a blessing and a curse. I never bothered to spend months on vi/vim because every time I used for days or weeks (out of not having other choices) I came out of it with the distinct idea that the whole thing was just short of lunacy. In the context of the project that needed to be completed these tools offered no real advantages. You are not going to impact the bottom line in any measurable way.
Put another way: If you took two kids that knew nothing whatsoever about computers or programming and set out to teach them. One is taught with modern mostly-GUI tools with "conventional" keyboard shortcuts while the other has to use command line and vi/vim. Both of them have to complete the same project. The vi kid would be absolutely smoked by the other kid in no time at all. No question about it.
OK, how about a second project. Maybe not smoked, but no significant gains would exist out of the vi camp. Programming is far more about things that have nothing to do with text editing. Projects are not late or buggy because of good or bad text editing tools.
I'd still like to see someone quantify the gains offered by vi/vim over the course of a project.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but the efficiency gains are not mutually exclusive. Why would you think they are?
Because I am arguing that the purported efficiency gains from the use of vi/vim are insignificant in the context of a non-trivial project. Far more time can be gained (or lost) through activities that have nothing whatsoever to do with text editing. As an optimization problem, text editing is the wrong aspect of creating a software product to focus on. Software projects are notorious for being way behind schedule. If…
They are important to programmers.
You are arguing against a strawman that I suspect you do not even realize you have constructed.