Live data from Hacker News

Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

andre.arko.net

51–60 of 145 posts

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#51
post #41
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would actually love to hear some specific and insightful criticisms of Vim ... Sure, no problem: * It's still a command-line editor. Just like vi. * To perform multiple operations, like moving the cursor around, entering text, deleting text, searching the document, saving and loading files, requires you to switch modes. Just like vi. * It cannot take advantage of the modern computing environment -- mouse navigati…

> * To perform multiple operations, like moving the cursor around, entering text, deleting text, searching the document, saving and loading files, requires you to switch modes. Just like vi. All these operations, except entering text, are available from "normal" mode which is the default mode. This is factually incorrect that you need to switch mode to delete something, or save a file.

To me, it sounds like he's made the classic "vim newbie" mistake of thinking of insert mode as the default, and then switching to normal mode to do anything other than edit text. It's easy to see how that would cause a painful experience.

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#52
post #2

> Vim is the worst editor ... except all the other editors Yes to the first five words, no to the rest. How many Vim users realize that some of its more infuriating behaviors can be traced back to its predecessor vi, which had to be able operate with a "paper terminal", essentially a roll of paper as a display, without wasting too much paper during editing? And how do I know this? During my time at NASA designing par…

Ah - Paul Lutus, the fantastically boring, ridiculously bad wig-wearing dinosaur manages to wheel himself into another discussion by popular demand from no-one at all to remind the participants how he wrote Apple Writer and worked on the Space Shuttle and is a multimillionare. How many people use Apple Writer these days Paul? Is it more than Vim? A number closer to zero? The bitterness seething out of your every pore that your software has been consigned to the graveyard of history whilst Vim is growing in popularity is so tangible!

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#53
post #41
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would actually love to hear some specific and insightful criticisms of Vim ... Sure, no problem: * It's still a command-line editor. Just like vi. * To perform multiple operations, like moving the cursor around, entering text, deleting text, searching the document, saving and loading files, requires you to switch modes. Just like vi. * It cannot take advantage of the modern computing environment -- mouse navigati…

> * To perform multiple operations, like moving the cursor around, entering text, deleting text, searching the document, saving and loading files, requires you to switch modes. Just like vi. All these operations, except entering text, are available from "normal" mode which is the default mode. This is factually incorrect that you need to switch mode to delete something, or save a file.

> This is factually incorrect ...

If you, like most people, spend most of your time entering text, then it is factually correct that you must exit the text-entry mode to do anything else.

And do you know why this arrangement exists? Because there were teletype terminals and early glass terminals that didn't have control keys. No control keys, no way to exploit their existence. SO there had to be a magic character to switch from text entry to control mode. And the magic character was an ordinary character, sometimes used for text entry, sometimes interpreted as a command prefix.

Keyboards have changed, but vi hasn't. Computers have mice and touch-sensitive displays, but vi can't exploit them. Operating systems have clipboards, but vi can't take advantage of that convention. You know -- don't get me started.

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#54
post #51
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * To perform multiple operations, like moving the cursor around, entering text, deleting text, searching the document, saving and loading files, requires you to switch modes. Just like vi. All these operations, except entering text, are available from "normal" mode which is the default mode. This is factually incorrect that you need to switch mode to delete something, or save a file.

To me, it sounds like he's made the classic "vim newbie" mistake of thinking of insert mode as the default, and then switching to normal mode to do anything other than edit text. It's easy to see how that would cause a painful experience.

> To me, it sounds like he's made the classic "vim newbie" ...

Based on simple probability, the chance is better than 50% that I was using vi before you were born.

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#55
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be an otherwise great guy with insightful comments and writings[1] that I occasionaly see on elsethreads. But as soon as a vim post hits the frontpage here you are to rehash the same authority fallacies, brag about having used and created this and that editor, and claim that what's in discussion here is as good as vi (which wasn't even extensible to begin with.) If you hated the little editor so much duri…

> ... why do you insist on visiting these threads and reliving such horrid memories? That's easy to answer -- as astonishing as it may sound, people are still using vim. Some of them might even think it's natural to have to use twice as many keystrokes as are required on a modern editor, even another command-line editor, to switch from editing to navigating (as just one example). > I'm not sure who you're trying to s…

Please tell me more about this modern editor where half the keystrokes get the same job done.

Or tell me about any editor where the same amount of keystrokes get the same job done.

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#56
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be an otherwise great guy with insightful comments and writings[1] that I occasionaly see on elsethreads. But as soon as a vim post hits the frontpage here you are to rehash the same authority fallacies, brag about having used and created this and that editor, and claim that what's in discussion here is as good as vi (which wasn't even extensible to begin with.) If you hated the little editor so much duri…

> ... why do you insist on visiting these threads and reliving such horrid memories? That's easy to answer -- as astonishing as it may sound, people are still using vim. Some of them might even think it's natural to have to use twice as many keystrokes as are required on a modern editor, even another command-line editor, to switch from editing to navigating (as just one example). > I'm not sure who you're trying to s…

On the contrary, you seem to be the "True Believer" refusing to be dissuaded. Is it so hard to believe there might be a degree of personal preference and intuition to a certain approach that one might want to keep using it? Typically, a good engineer prides himself on using The Right Tool For The Job (TM) modulo by an appropriate degree what works well for him. (Especially in something like editor where the choice is all but if not transparent to the end product)

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#57
post #2

> Vim is the worst editor ... except all the other editors Yes to the first five words, no to the rest. How many Vim users realize that some of its more infuriating behaviors can be traced back to its predecessor vi, which had to be able operate with a "paper terminal", essentially a roll of paper as a display, without wasting too much paper during editing? And how do I know this? During my time at NASA designing par…

Oh, it's you again. We talked about this some time ago. Since then I stopped using Vim in favor of Emacs, which is modeless - I remember that having modes was the biggest sin of Vim in your eyes.

It's been 5 months since I switched to Emacs. My .emacs.d is actually bigger than .vim_runtime was, but it's because of more configurable features found in Emacs plugins, so it's natural. My init.el is also longer than my .vimrc, but this is because of much friendlier Emacs API and my love for Lisps (and dislike for vimscript). On the whole I'm quite pleased with the switch, although making Emacs into my editor took a comparable amount of time and code to Vim. I don't use Evil or anything like it, of course.

Emacs is better in many respects. CEDET is nice, SpeedBar and imenu with it's syntactic extensions work wonders - TagBar in Vim comes close to SpeedBar, but there's no imenu. auto-complete is better than omni-complete and easier to extend. Eshell works better than conque. Icicles, ido and smex make working with minibuffer a pleasure to the extent that Vim could never match - although it has basic completion of commands. Of course there is more, but the important thing to note here is that, while Emacs implements many things a bit better, Vim has them too. And it's perfectly reasonable to prefer Vim versions. So what I'm saying is that I found Emacs better but Vim is still really great.

Ok, so now to the modality. Emacs lacks modes, Vim has them. Last time we talked you were saying that modes are inefficient and hard to use. I could argue for modality then, but not against it, because I lacked experience with non-modal editor. Now I can compare the two.

The truth is that I was suspicious of non-modal editing in Emacs. I heard and read many rants about long sequences of modifier keys you need to press in order to do something. Turns out these rants where right for the most part. Some examples: C-- C-4 C-x performs hard dedent by four spaces. C-s C-w C-s ... performs incremental search (forward) for current word (Esc # in Vim). C-4 M-f goes four words forward (4w in Vim). There are also tricky ones, like C-x d opening dired and much easier to type C-x C-d displaying a list of files in current directory in a buffer.

In practice, however, with some amount of remapping, this is not an issue. But wait, isn't pressing escape instead of some universal prefix (C-c for user commands in emacs) not a problem in practice, too? After using Emacs and Vim I can say that the complexity of commands in both is almost the same. In Vim I remapped Esc to CapsLock - in Emacs I have Ctrl in place of CapsLock (although I'm contemplating placing Alt there and Ctrl in place of Alt). The only real difference I feel is that in Vim I could just hit the first modifier key (esc) while in Emacs I need to keep it pressed. Emacs uses Alt (Meta), while Vim does not, but that's a little difference, because Alt is usually in a place that's easy to reach.

In conclusion, while I like Emacs very much, I still find your claim that "modal editors" are for sad, handicapped individuals who just don't know any better full of bullshit. Modality is not any worse than modeless model in itself and Vim implements modality in a way which makes using it as convenient as Emacs chords. While there are other things I like in Emacs better, bashing Vim because of modes alone is pure stupidity; bashing it because of it's ancestry is an equivalent of saying that "your mama is fat" and saying it has no X feature is most likely false anyway.

PS. Elsewhere in this thread you're saying that Vim can't use mouse and clipboard. Of course it can - "=y copies to system clipboard instead of local one. I admit that Emacs support for mouse events is by far superior, and of course typesetting - colors, sizes and styles of fonts - are well supported in Emacs and not in Vim. But reaching for the mouse is bad anyway and if you have to, Vim supports all three mouse keys, which only makes the latter a valid claim. It's up to everyone to decide whether they truly need different fonts in their editor.

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#58
post #54
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, it sounds like he's made the classic "vim newbie" mistake of thinking of insert mode as the default, and then switching to normal mode to do anything other than edit text. It's easy to see how that would cause a painful experience.

> To me, it sounds like he's made the classic "vim newbie" ... Based on simple probability, the chance is better than 50% that I was using vi before you were born.

Nice ad hominem. Using vi before any of us was born does not mean you avoided the classic "vim newbie" mistake.

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#59
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would actually love to hear some specific and insightful criticisms of Vim, but referring to its history is not a particularly compelling one (for me, at least). In today's terms, the above "without wasting too much paper during editing" argument translates into "with as few keystrokes as possible". In some situations, I definitely find my ability to type (or in general, to edit text) to be the bottleneck in gettin…

> I would actually love to hear some specific and insightful criticisms of Vim ... Sure, no problem: * It's still a command-line editor. Just like vi. * To perform multiple operations, like moving the cursor around, entering text, deleting text, searching the document, saving and loading files, requires you to switch modes. Just like vi. * It cannot take advantage of the modern computing environment -- mouse navigati…

gvim comes standard with vim with

vim defaults to allowing the cursor keys and delete/backspace.

I mouse around my gvim with my custom font all day long middle click pasting snippets in from the browser.

Re: Vim is the worst editor, except all the other editors

#60
post #2

> Vim is the worst editor ... except all the other editors Yes to the first five words, no to the rest. How many Vim users realize that some of its more infuriating behaviors can be traced back to its predecessor vi, which had to be able operate with a "paper terminal", essentially a roll of paper as a display, without wasting too much paper during editing? And how do I know this? During my time at NASA designing par…

Ah - Paul Lutus, the fantastically boring, ridiculously bad wig-wearing dinosaur manages to wheel himself into another discussion by popular demand from no-one at all to remind the participants how he wrote Apple Writer and worked on the Space Shuttle and is a multimillionare. How many people use Apple Writer these days Paul? Is it more than Vim? A number closer to zero? The bitterness seething out of your every pore…

Imagine bolstering your fantasies with evidence. Apple Writer was retired at just the right moment -- when something better came along. That's how technology works, and no one was more pleased than I was.

> The bitterness seething out of your every pore that your software has been consigned to the graveyard ...

Dream on, moron. Apple Writer belongs in a museum along with vi. What's astonishing is that people are still using vi when there are any number of much better choices.

> ... whilst Vim is growing in popularity is so tangible!

Based on that fantasy, you may want to resume your medication.

Post reply on HN