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

History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

xahlee.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 91 posts

Re: History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

#61

Post by flukus »

submeta wrote: post #21

Interesting to see the Symbolics keyboard. As an Emacs user I had reprogrammed my ThinkPad keyboard (Windows) so that Alt -> Control Windows-key and Menu Key -> Alt Control keys -> Windows key So without having ever seen a Symbolics keyboard and without knowing the history behind emacs keyboard layout I remapped my keyboard so that I had very quick access to Control and Alt (= Meta) keys. On my Macbook it's not that…

As a tmux/vim user those extra control keys look amazing, there are too many layers fighting over too many control keys in my current setup, I'd love to have something like a dedicated vim accelerator, a dedicated tmux one, a dedicated console one and a dedicated desktop manager one.

Is anyone selling keyboards like this? What happened to those really expensive customizable keyboards from a few years back?

Re: History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

#62

Post by kps »

ScottBurson wrote: post #55
tetraodonpuffer wrote: post #36

what is the difference between "backspace" and "rubout"? the emacs keyboard had both it seems, but wouldn't they be doing the same operation?

On an ASR33 Teletype, backspace simply moved the carriage one character position to the left. Rubout was a different concept entirely. The ASR33 had a paper tape punch and reader. The Rubout character was 0x7F, i.e., it had all bits set. So, to "rub out" an erroneous character from the paper tape, you could back the tape up in the punch to the desired character (by pressing a button on the punch; there was no charact…

  > notwithstanding that the ASR33's concept of Rubout didn't
  > really map at all onto the new hardware.
If you are working with paper tape, Rubout (DEL in ASCII parlance), like every other code, advances the tape when punched. So, if the tape is a stream of characters, DEL erases the one under the cursor and leaves the cursor on the character formerly to the right. That is, Rubout/DEL is defined as a ‘forward delete’ operation, and that's something that remains useful.

That leaves Backspace as the natural choice for entering ‘backward delete’ on a keyboard, at least after 1979 when you have the ANSI X3.64 escape sequences for explicitly nondestructive cursor keys. I think there's a reasonable argument for Backspace being nondestructive for overstrike effects (accents, underlining, APL, etc.), especially when received by a terminal, but I know none for changing the meaning of DEL.

Re: History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

#63

Post by kps »

flukus wrote: post #60
gp2000 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In command contexts "." refers to the current line (e.g., :.,$s/a/b/ will perform the a -> b substitution from the current line to the last line of the file). That comes from ex which likely copied that from ed. I've seen "." used similarly in other contexts. 8-bit Microsoft BASIC used "." for the current line -- "LIST ." would list the last line that had been listed or edited. A number of assemblers use "." for the…

Also ./ for the current folder is still used on all OS's. I think your examples predate computers having folders though.

UNIX's ‘.’ predates Microsoft BASIC. (Possibly inherited from Multics, but I don't know.)

Re: History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

#64

Post by kps »

vlunkr wrote: post #20
atemerev wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mac default keymap looks intuitive enough for me. Opt+arrows for skipping words, Cmd+arrows for sentences. Beats absolutely arbitrary Ctrl-A/Ctrl-E and ^/$ definitively. (I am a proficient touch typist, but I can't adapt to hjkl in lieu of arrow keys — not to mention the context shifting overhead for two vim modes).

Is holding down one or more modifiers and pressing a key not a similar context switch? Typing 'v' enters a 'v' character, cmd/ctrl-v pastes from the clipboard. There's no logical connection between the two except that you've probably had that one memorized for decades. The difference in vim is that you don't use modifiers when you're in normal mode (usually). Side note: TWO vim modes? I guess you're never had the ple…

Yes, two modes: line and visual. The stuff between certain visual commands and ESC isn't a mode, it's a command argument.

Re: History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

#65

Post by flukus »

kps wrote: post #63
flukus wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also ./ for the current folder is still used on all OS's. I think your examples predate computers having folders though.

UNIX's ‘.’ predates Microsoft BASIC. (Possibly inherited from Multics, but I don't know.)

I was thinking more of ed, for some reason I thought folders were a later invention, 70's or early 80's, but they were first used in 1958: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directory_(computing)

Re: History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

#66

Post by yarabarla »

jmfurlott wrote: post #13
epistasis wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having caps lock where it is on current keyboards is in no way a superior design. It's a useless key in a prime location! Give me those "inferior" keyboards any day.

Map it to ctrl and emacs is unstoppable :)

I have it mapped to escape on a tap and ctrl on a long press. Vim and emacs :)

Re: History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

#67

Post by brudgers »

atilaneves wrote: post #29
jmfurlott wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Map it to ctrl and emacs is unstoppable :)

I keep seeing this advice and don't understand it. Do most people not touch type? What am I supposed to do about right ctrl?

The cheapest solution is the Microsoft Natural Ergonomic 4000 keyboard Speaking of touch typing, the TrackPoint between g and h is also helpful. Thinkpads and Dell Precisions typically have one. Some Toshiba's also. Though this sort of assumes that keyboard is a primary driver for a laptop purchase.

Re: History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

#68

Post by prewett »

LanceH wrote: post #19
AlexandrB wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bit of an oversimplification. Especially given how none of those keyboards look THAT different than what we use today. In particular, Vim's use of the home row for movement is objectively better than moving your hand off the home row and using the arrow keys (which you can do if you wish as well). I'm sure if someone was creating Vim today, they might choose WASD instead since many are familiar with the use…

I would prefer they pick jkl; instead of hjkl. I'm not a fan of shifting my right hand left and even less enthused about forcing my index finger into double duty on jh.

For a long time I used h, -, return, and space. I had a hard time remember what j and k did, and those were a lot easier to remember.

Re: History of Emacs and vi Keys (2010)

#69

Post by thomastjeffery »

atilaneves wrote: post #29
jmfurlott wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Map it to ctrl and emacs is unstoppable :)

I keep seeing this advice and don't understand it. Do most people not touch type? What am I supposed to do about right ctrl?

While I certainly do touchtype, I never taught my right hand to contort itself to reach control or shift. I occasionally press right alt with my thumb, but that's about it.

Mapping caps to control makes my keyboard a bit more usable, but it is still fundamentally flawed in a variety of ways.

That is probably one of the reasons ergodox (or similar) is so appealing to me.

Post reply on HN