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

Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 171 posts

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#141

Post by blggr »

lone-commenter wrote: post #129
susam wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know the image post in your comment exaggerates the Emacs input sequence for humorous effect but I got curious and decided to count the actual keystrokes for a real world common use case. Say, we want to replace one string with another, e.g., "foo" with "bar" as it appears in your image post. So assuming that we need simple string replacement, not regex-based replacement, and also assuming that we have vanilla Vim,…

Except the emacs sequence will get you tendinitis in the long run, won't it?

Yes, that's why I use Vim and not Emacs. Much easier on the hands.

I also avoid using hjkl all the time and use the arrow keys to counter RSI.

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#142

Post by penguin_booze »

mfontani wrote: post #116
susam wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know the image post in your comment exaggerates the Emacs input sequence for humorous effect but I got curious and decided to count the actual keystrokes for a real world common use case. Say, we want to replace one string with another, e.g., "foo" with "bar" as it appears in your image post. So assuming that we need simple string replacement, not regex-based replacement, and also assuming that we have vanilla Vim,…

> On Vim: +; (:) nnoremap ; : I've never missed the default behaviour of ";" (to repeat the last "t"-like command), and the above has helped me tremendously

I, on the other hand, use ';' quite heavily:

  void theWorldsLongestFunction(int way, int too, int many, int parameters);
Then,

  0f,;;;
Is my self-approved way to jump through the parameters.

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#143

Post by Lio »

susam wrote: post #95
visviva wrote: post #70

Thank you for posting this and giving me a reason to reread my all time favorite greentext: https://i.imgur.com/WLzeQMj.png

I know the image post in your comment exaggerates the Emacs input sequence for humorous effect but I got curious and decided to count the actual keystrokes for a real world common use case. Say, we want to replace one string with another, e.g., "foo" with "bar" as it appears in your image post. So assuming that we need simple string replacement, not regex-based replacement, and also assuming that we have vanilla Vim,…

Personally, if my cursor was on the "foo" I'd probably use:

  *gcn.
That is:

  * (highlight all occurrences of foo)
  gcn (globally changes the highlighted pattern)
   (the text you want to replace with)
  . (repeat the command as many times as you want).
If you know you want to change all the occurrences at once you can highlight "foo" with * (shift-8) and then use :%s//bar/g as it will be set as the last regexp.

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#144

Post by Lio »

mfontani wrote: post #116
susam wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know the image post in your comment exaggerates the Emacs input sequence for humorous effect but I got curious and decided to count the actual keystrokes for a real world common use case. Say, we want to replace one string with another, e.g., "foo" with "bar" as it appears in your image post. So assuming that we need simple string replacement, not regex-based replacement, and also assuming that we have vanilla Vim,…

> On Vim: +; (:) nnoremap ; : I've never missed the default behaviour of ";" (to repeat the last "t"-like command), and the above has helped me tremendously

I use ; a lot.

However I don't mind using shift as I always press it with the opposite hand to one that's pressing the key to be shifted.

I also use a lot insert mode Ctrl commands.

I think any keyboard interface that you can use without looking at the keyboard is Ok by me.

I would probably be happy enough in emacs even with all the weird cording but I'm just too wedded to Vim at this point to want to change.

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#145

Post by ccozan »

peteretep wrote: post #102
fhunt wrote: post #101

Thought how great, for a split-second. But key for being 24/7 in front my computer with zero issues for decades is among other things—I move all the time, hence I need a keyboard which moves all the way with me and you can imagine that my feet are also moving their location and nobody wants to arrange all the foot paddles every time you move. And in these times in your home office it's great to put your feet up here…

Combine the camera for a facial expression based input instead? Grimace to change modes?

maybe eyes blinking? Left eye blink -> i, again,, right eye -> (maybe) o , again

double blinking would be also fun to map!

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#146

Post by sasaf5 »

susam wrote: post #95
visviva wrote: post #70

Thank you for posting this and giving me a reason to reread my all time favorite greentext: https://i.imgur.com/WLzeQMj.png

I know the image post in your comment exaggerates the Emacs input sequence for humorous effect but I got curious and decided to count the actual keystrokes for a real world common use case. Say, we want to replace one string with another, e.g., "foo" with "bar" as it appears in your image post. So assuming that we need simple string replacement, not regex-based replacement, and also assuming that we have vanilla Vim,…

Once I tried Vim because everyone says it's faster, but I found that to be exaggerated. For example:

save in Vim:

  [esc] : w enter
3 or 4 keystrokes involving two hands.

save in emacs:

  C-x-s
one 3 fingered chord with the left hand.

And the chords can be hit much faster than key sequences.

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#147

Post by bryanrasmussen »

visviva wrote: post #70

Thank you for posting this and giving me a reason to reread my all time favorite greentext: https://i.imgur.com/WLzeQMj.png

E-macs doesn't have two extra leopards, it has exactly the correct number of leopards ALL THE TIME!

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#148

Post by mauvehaus »

pkulak wrote: post #65
mauvehaus wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Granny shifting when you should've been double clutching..."

I still don't understand why you would double clutch a Honda Civic. Especially if you were trying to like, go real fast.

Upshifting, it isn't usually necessary, though I'm not a street racer, so I can't comment on the validity of that particular quote [0].

Downshifting, particularly into first as you're coming to a stop sign, it'll save a fair amount of wear on the synchros. Or if you have a car with worn synchros, it'll help ensure a quicker, smoother downshift in general. A 5-3 downshift on an offramp usually benefits, for instance.

[0] Given the substantial liberties they took in general, your skepticism might be justified.

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#149

Post by hinkley »

susam wrote: post #107
susam wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know the image post in your comment exaggerates the Emacs input sequence for humorous effect but I got curious and decided to count the actual keystrokes for a real world common use case. Say, we want to replace one string with another, e.g., "foo" with "bar" as it appears in your image post. So assuming that we need simple string replacement, not regex-based replacement, and also assuming that we have vanilla Vim,…

Adding further to my previous comment: What if we really need to do regex, say replace "f.." with "bar"? The input sequences then look like this: On Vim: +; (:) +5 (%) s/f../bar/g (16 key strokes) On Emacs: + +, (M- bar +1 (!) (17 key strokes) Although, the number of key strokes are close to each other for both Vim and Emacs, I am pretty sure most beginners would feel there is a slightly increased cognitive overhead…

> On Emacs: ++, (M- bar +1 (!) (17 key strokes)

I get 19 here, and a lot more keys off the home row. Four keys at once is quite a bit slower for many people than two or even three.

Re: Vim Clutch – A hardware pedal for improved text editing (2012)

#150

Post by hinkley »

steerablesafe wrote: post #140
susam wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adding further to my previous comment: What if we really need to do regex, say replace "f.." with "bar"? The input sequences then look like this: On Vim: +; (:) +5 (%) s/f../bar/g (16 key strokes) On Emacs: + +, (M- bar +1 (!) (17 key strokes) Although, the number of key strokes are close to each other for both Vim and Emacs, I am pretty sure most beginners would feel there is a slightly increased cognitive overhead…

> Ctrl+Alt+Shift+5 My fingers just broke reading that. Having said that I don't have a right alt key, as it's altgr . I suppose it's advisable to have two alt keys to use emacs.

I think people mash all 3 control keys with the left hand and reach across for the 5, or stretch their fingers very awkwardly and do all four. We’re into Rachmaninov territory at that point.
Post reply on HN