101–110 of 145 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is/are your replacement(s) for VIM?
> What is/are your replacement(s) for VIM? Anything at all. Kate. KWrite. Gedit. The programming editors built into Netbeans and Eclipse. My own (free) program Arachnophilia ( http://arachnoid.com/arachnophilia ), a sort of a descendant of Apple Writer, but much improved and with support for many document types. Essentially anything. All the above choices take advantage of the modern computing environment. That by it…
I would choose VIM over Gedit simply because remote servers tend to have vi/vim installed out of the box, not to mention the fact that Gedit is to me not really all that great (perhaps a bit better than M$'s Wordpad).
VIM is my default editor for sysadmin work; for coding it's Eclipse for server-side and Aptana for client-side (which I guess is Eclipse under the hood, just not as bloated).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll point out that any modern version of vim uses mice just fine. It also uses the system clipboard just fine. The reason most vim users stick with the keyboard is because using a short key combination to select and manipulate text is measurably faster than moving your hand off the keyboard, manipulating a mouse or touchscreen, and then moving it back to continue typing.
> I'll point out that any modern version of vim uses mice just fine. It also uses the system clipboard just fine. What you see as vim appearing to exploit a mouse and system clipboard is actually Bash and (sometimes) a command-line app (example Konsole) doing so, or equivalent utilities outside vim in a non-GUI level. Those features work with any editor in exactly the same way. As to using the system clipboard just f…
I'm not sure if you're just joking or you're just misinformed.
For text editing, mouse is more inefficient than keystrokes
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... 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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hate vim too, but some of your points are simply not true: > * 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. Open a file. Insert some text. Use arrow keys to scroll. Hit Alt-/ to search forward. Hit Alt-Shift-/ to search backwards. Sure, some commands need you to switch modes,…
> I hate vim too, but some of your points are simply not true Your claim is that what I said is false. > Sure, some commands need you to switch modes, but not all. Your claim is that what I said is true. Only one of the above comments can be so. If one is true, then the other is false. Take your pick.
First of all, you have to dump Janus. It is bad for you. Learn to use stock Vim and gradually integrate plugins as needed. I recommend NeoBundle to manage them, as it is able to compile plugins if required. I've been using vim for years and the only plugins I use are vim-airline[1] and vim-bufferline[2]. Of course, my editing needs may not be as complex as yours, but in reality most things you think you need a plugin…
That may well be good advice, but it doesn't really solve the other problems he's complaining about, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're calling vim commands "modes" to deliberately make it sound more complex than it is. * I am moving the cursor, but I want to enter text. To do so, I need to enter colon, i, Enter, then my first text entry. * I am entering text, but I want to move the cursor. To do so, I need to type Esc, Esc, then commence moving the cursor. * If while entering text, I want to do something besides move the cursor, I need to t…
Vim has changed a lot since when you were using vi or your memories are off - either way your descriptions are inaccurate. They lead to the explanation of the miscommunication about modes though. You don't type ':i' to get to insert mode, you just hit 'i'. You don't hit Esc, Esc - it's just Esc (though lots of people remap it to 'jj'). Really these are the two modes I was referring to - you need to move between them,…
I just crafted the above example using the current vim. No memory required. Vim still imitates vi, and vi still imitates 1970. Extremely inefficient, steep learning curve in order not to press readily available control keys.
> I don't understand what's comical about 'c3w' - "Change 3 Words".
First, if you happen to be entering text beforehand, the number of characters required to select three words isn't three, it's five. Second, it's comical in modern times because there are much easier ways to select an arbitrary number of words, readily available ways, ways that don't cost any more than vim does, ways that are available on the machines owned by vim's advocates -- excuse me, living advocates. Machines that have keyboards with control keys.
On a modern machine, if I want to select three words, or 2 1/2 words, or 3 1/2 paragraphs, I glide the mouse cursor across the desired text. And to do so, I don't have to enter a special mouse mode first.
This conversation is funny for the same reasons that a conversation about a horseless carriage is funny. No, there's no miniature horse hidden in there -- they did away with the horse entirely. I know it sounds fantastic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're calling vim commands "modes" to deliberately make it sound more complex than it is. * I am moving the cursor, but I want to enter text. To do so, I need to enter colon, i, Enter, then my first text entry. * I am entering text, but I want to move the cursor. To do so, I need to type Esc, Esc, then commence moving the cursor. * If while entering text, I want to do something besides move the cursor, I need to t…
One last reply from me for the time being: > * I am moving the cursor, but I want to enter text. To do so, I need to enter colon, i, Enter, then my first text entry. That's incorrect. You can just press 'i' to enter insert mode in place. Or upper case 'I' to have Vim enter insert mode at the end of a line. Or upper case O for insert mode at the beginning of freshly inserted line below the current. Or 'a', 'A', 'c', '…
It's not common in modern times for any of this to be either necessary or justifiable. But now that we're no longer discussing how inefficient vim is, but discussing tricks meant to minimize its acknowledged inefficiency, I think we're done.
> > I wold pass the mouse cursor across the desired characters, thus selecting them (any subset of characters or words or paragraphs, and very, very fast)
> Well... I would like to measure this somehow.
You can measure it by noticing that most modern computers since 1980 have control keys, and mice, and nearly none of them have vi or vim installed. People have voted against terminal editors with their mice, and with an absolute minimum of keystrokes.
> We - Vim users here - can probably show you shorter and more efficient counterpart to any example you'd come up with.
This is the most astonishing conversation I've had in weeks. I can also show you more efficient ways to push a rock up a steep slope while wearing a hair shirt, but the risk is that some spoilsport may mention that the entire exercise is unnecessary.
I started out using vi. Then I wrote Apple Writer, which was more efficient by far. Then I dumped Apple Writer for a more efficient editor that supported a mouse. Then I dumped that editor for a better one, ad infinitum. Lazy? You bet -- I have better things to do with my time than remember vim's arcane ways to avoid the use of the keys that are on all modern keyboards, or the pointing devices that have become popular since 1970.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're calling vim commands "modes" to deliberately make it sound more complex than it is. * I am moving the cursor, but I want to enter text. To do so, I need to enter colon, i, Enter, then my first text entry. * I am entering text, but I want to move the cursor. To do so, I need to type Esc, Esc, then commence moving the cursor. * If while entering text, I want to do something besides move the cursor, I need to t…
The truth is, Vim gives you lovely model editing and full use of the mouse, it isn't either or, you get both! ":set mouse=a" and you can use it like you probably expect, select stuff, move around the file, use your scroll-wheel, etc. Remember with no .vimrc vim defaults to vi emulation mode for historical reasons. ":set nocompatible" to fix that, compatible mode turns off a lot of the wonderful Vim features us Vimmer…
Thereby allowing vim to become almost as efficient as a modern editor, specifically by disabling those traits that make vim vim.
> Once you get used to modes based editing, it is an amazing addition to any editor or GUI ...
That would be why why modern editor designers make sure to include a modes mode, to appeal to time travelers visiting from earlier times. Yes, I'm kidding -- no one wants an interface that requires any more than the absolute minimum of either keystrokes or arcana unique to one editor.
> ... the reason emacs and vim live on is because of fitness for the task at hand, editing text.
As to the thread's topic, this is false. Vi and vim aren't as efficient as a modern editor, which is why most current computer programming activity uses tools designed with a modern computer -- and a modern computer user -- in mind.
I could easily write an editor much more efficient than vi/vim -- I know this because I did, and it became very popular -- and its advantages would become obvious to all but True Believers.
As soon as someone invented the control key and its purpose, and well before Douglas Engelbart invented the mouse, the retirement clock started ticking for vi and vim. It's still ticking, but it seems not everyone can hear it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The modes that you complain about (and let's be honest - there are really just 2 that you use) ... No, to switch from entering text, to deleting text, to searching for text, to copying and pasting text, to saving a file, to loading a file, all require switching modes. Let's be honest. > By making that compromise you make the system faster and more powerful ... Having to enter additional keystrokes, a throwback to a…
> No, to switch from entering text, to deleting text, to searching for text, to copying and pasting text, to saving a file, to loading a file, all require switching modes. Let's be honest. Please define a mode and define mode switching. It's obvious we use different definitions for those and so we can't have meaningful discussion.
If I'm entering text, I cannot move the cursor. Mode one.
If I'm moving the cursor, I cannot enter text. Mode two.
If I'm using a modern editor, these modes are not present -- if I want to move the cursor, I press the appropriate keyboard keys. Instead of pressing a letter key to insert a letter, I press the up-arrow key to move the editing cursor, without any preliminary mode-switching keys. This means an absolute minimum of keystrokes, and because there are no modes, the letter keys always insert letters, and the arrow keys always move the cursor.
All before beginning to discuss the mouse or other pointing devices, methods that have existed since 1963 and have been in wide use since 1980.
Any questions?