4 ms·

> im is intuitive ( -ish?) once you understand what each character means If you have to understand it first to find it intuitive, then it isn't intuitive.

nemetroid 10y ago
Once you understand what c, 2, a and w mean (individually, in context), the command "c2aw" is intuitive.
- gnaritas 10y ago
  That command might be intuitive to a vim user, but vim itself is anything but intuitive to someone who doesn't already know it. I'm disputing the intuitiveness of vim, which is what was claimed, not the intuitiveness of a key combination to a vim user.
- aninhumer 10y ago
  Is it? I know what those characters mean, and I used to use vim, but I'm really not sure how they'd compose here. What does it mean to change and append at the same time? In fact I just tested it and I'm still not clear what c2aw does. It seems to just do the same thing as c2w.
  - jonchang 10y ago
    It does something similar to c2w if your cursor is at the beginning of a word. But if your cursor is already in the middle of a word c2aw may be faster / more intuitive than doing bc2w. "a" can mean "append" but in this context (as the argument to a command) it means to change "a word". See :h aw for details.
    - JetSpiegel 10y ago
      It's better to think of it as "all word", as opposed to "iw" as "inner word". It's easier to think about with "it" for "inner XML tag", apply stuff only between the opening and closing tags, of "at" for the whole thing, tags included. So "dat" would delete the tag and its content, while "cit" would change the content of the tag.
nikki93 10y ago
Hmm I disagree. At first it isn't intuitive, then it becomes intuitive after practice. I think what the commenter meant by "once you understand" is "once you have practiced." Sort of like how skiing becomes intuitive but isn't at first, or such.
- gnaritas 10y ago
  That's not what intuitive means, especially not in the context of a UI. > At first it isn't intuitive, Then it isn't intuitive. An intuitive UI is one that requires little to no instruction because it just works and is discoverable naturally, vi/vim are exactly the opposite, they are the most unintuitive UI practically ever invented. There is nothing remotely intuitive about vi/vim. The barrier to entry is huge and is the main reason people don't use this editor. > Sort of like how skiing becomes intuitive but isn't at first, or such. Skiing isn't intuitive either. Getting good requires practice, that you had to practice it to get the feel for it means exactly that it isn't intuitive. Once you're good, it's not because it's intuitive, it's because you practiced and taught yourself new muscle memory.
  - nikki93 10y ago
    No one is said vim is an intuitive UI, or whatever. It's simply the conditional like A => B, where A is "you know what c, a and w" mean, and then B is regarding another feature that becomes intuitive once A is true. Pick anything that you think is intuitive and I'll show you a prerequisite for it, and some times that prerequisite is sort of "bootstrap human knowledge" like "touching things that move." For a moment, try stepping away from the semantics of what 'intuitive UI' means as a holistic thing, and think of it this way: when you read an angry letter from someone, you are immediately flustered, or something. This happens intuitively. But it only happens if you already know how to read the words and what they mean. It isn't intuitive if you don't know the language. Intuition is perspectivized and based on prior context, etc. The human using the tool is defined by their history, stuff like that. The commenter is just saying, the way I see it, given X in the history of the user, where X is "understands what each character means" (this is now assumed as part of the user's identity), that some other aspects of the entire vim-as-a-text-editor process becomes intuitive. Yet another example is, an app meant for musicians, like Ableton, where some things are intuitive because they have rhythm and/or melody knowledge or know what filters are, but isn't intuitive if they don't. It's a spectrum. The most interesting questions are often about such nuance. Vim is interesting, and it has stuck around. I don't know, but I personally care less about semantics than about the human-processes that actually result from the way programs are. Call it 'intuitive' or not, what do you see actually happening? What I see is people making really quick edits (I often see this in myself) that I can't do in other editors that I am able to do as an extension of myself sort of the same way I feel about playing percussion in a band.

nemetroid 10y ago

Once you understand what c, 2, a and w mean (individually, in context), the command "c2aw" is intuitive.

gnaritas 10y ago
That command might be intuitive to a vim user, but vim itself is anything but intuitive to someone who doesn't already know it. I'm disputing the intuitiveness of vim, which is what was claimed, not the intuitiveness of a key combination to a vim user.
aninhumer 10y ago
Is it? I know what those characters mean, and I used to use vim, but I'm really not sure how they'd compose here. What does it mean to change and append at the same time? In fact I just tested it and I'm still not clear what c2aw does. It seems to just do the same thing as c2w.
- jonchang 10y ago
  It does something similar to c2w if your cursor is at the beginning of a word. But if your cursor is already in the middle of a word c2aw may be faster / more intuitive than doing bc2w. "a" can mean "append" but in this context (as the argument to a command) it means to change "a word". See :h aw for details.
  - JetSpiegel 10y ago
    It's better to think of it as "all word", as opposed to "iw" as "inner word". It's easier to think about with "it" for "inner XML tag", apply stuff only between the opening and closing tags, of "at" for the whole thing, tags included. So "dat" would delete the tag and its content, while "cit" would change the content of the tag.

nikki93 10y ago

Hmm I disagree. At first it isn't intuitive, then it becomes intuitive after practice. I think what the commenter meant by "once you understand" is "once you have practiced." Sort of like how skiing becomes intuitive but isn't at first, or such.

gnaritas 10y ago
That's not what intuitive means, especially not in the context of a UI. > At first it isn't intuitive, Then it isn't intuitive. An intuitive UI is one that requires little to no instruction because it just works and is discoverable naturally, vi/vim are exactly the opposite, they are the most unintuitive UI practically ever invented. There is nothing remotely intuitive about vi/vim. The barrier to entry is huge and is the main reason people don't use this editor. > Sort of like how skiing becomes intuitive but isn't at first, or such. Skiing isn't intuitive either. Getting good requires practice, that you had to practice it to get the feel for it means exactly that it isn't intuitive. Once you're good, it's not because it's intuitive, it's because you practiced and taught yourself new muscle memory.
- nikki93 10y ago
  No one is said vim is an intuitive UI, or whatever. It's simply the conditional like A => B, where A is "you know what c, a and w" mean, and then B is regarding another feature that becomes intuitive once A is true. Pick anything that you think is intuitive and I'll show you a prerequisite for it, and some times that prerequisite is sort of "bootstrap human knowledge" like "touching things that move." For a moment, try stepping away from the semantics of what 'intuitive UI' means as a holistic thing, and think of it this way: when you read an angry letter from someone, you are immediately flustered, or something. This happens intuitively. But it only happens if you already know how to read the words and what they mean. It isn't intuitive if you don't know the language. Intuition is perspectivized and based on prior context, etc. The human using the tool is defined by their history, stuff like that. The commenter is just saying, the way I see it, given X in the history of the user, where X is "understands what each character means" (this is now assumed as part of the user's identity), that some other aspects of the entire vim-as-a-text-editor process becomes intuitive. Yet another example is, an app meant for musicians, like Ableton, where some things are intuitive because they have rhythm and/or melody knowledge or know what filters are, but isn't intuitive if they don't. It's a spectrum. The most interesting questions are often about such nuance. Vim is interesting, and it has stuck around. I don't know, but I personally care less about semantics than about the human-processes that actually result from the way programs are. Call it 'intuitive' or not, what do you see actually happening? What I see is people making really quick edits (I often see this in myself) that I can't do in other editors that I am able to do as an extension of myself sort of the same way I feel about playing percussion in a band.