3 ms·

I'd argue Vim is actually the intuitive choice because its commands allow motion/editing across boundaries that make sense, without (in my opinion) awkward mous

by tokipin 10y ago

I'd argue Vim is actually the intuitive choice because its commands allow motion/editing across boundaries that make sense, without (in my opinion) awkward mouse/cursor motions. For example % at a function call will edit/select the whole call if the cursor is at the beginning of the function name. Once you have the muscle memory, you use little thought on how to mechanically accomplish editing tasks, so the intent-to-accomplishment pathway is quite direct. In the end though this may not be the case for you, even if you earnestly dove into it. I think the main difficulty with learning Vim is that its commands are like minimal "combinators" attached to arbitrary keys, and they take exploration/use to experientially bubble up these combinators to reach "comfort parity" with standard editors. In this way Vim is like the Lisp of editors. About the ugliness, I agree. That's why I usually use a GUI version if I can. Plus it must be reiterated that Vim is more just a text editor, not an IDE like Visual Studio. If I could use VS+VsVim for everything, I would.

pmoriarty 10y ago
"About the ugliness, I agree." I understand how pleasant it is to use a tool that you spend a lot of time in day in and day out that is beautifully designed and just looks and feels nice. I remember slightly drooling at how some fonts in a competing editor seemed to have a subtle glow. I would have liked to have that in vim, and maybe it is possible. There are some other GUI improvements that could make it look/feel nicer. However, as a power user give me function over form any day. It's like the choice between taking a long, beautiful path vs a short, ugly one. Or maybe the long beautiful path can't even go where the short ugly path goes. Most of the time, I'm using my editor to get things done, and done as quickly and efficiently as possible. I'm not using it to admire how beautiful my editor looks or show its looks off to friends. If I have a choice between getting my work done in 2 seconds vs 5 minutes, I'll choose the 2 seconds. There must have been hundreds of times in my life where I've done a really complex set of editing tasks in vim (or emacs) in a couple of minutes that I know would have taken me hours and driven me insane in a traditional editor. After learning vim (and emacs) being forced to use a traditional editor is like cutting off my arms. It's like being forced to drive a car that can go only 5 miles an hour and only make 90 degree turns. Super painful and it may not even be capable of doing what you want, and certainly not quickly, efficiently, or pleasantly. Though certainly the more sophisticated traditional editors are far better than primitive traditional editors like notepad or nano (though some people still swear by those and will not even think of leaving them!). It's really hard to get across to people only used to traditional editors the sheer power that vim and emacs have. It's something that you really have to be a veteran of these editors to fully appreciate -- and that usually takes years.

by tokipin 10y ago

pmoriarty 10y ago

"About the ugliness, I agree." I understand how pleasant it is to use a tool that you spend a lot of time in day in and day out that is beautifully designed and just looks and feels nice. I remember slightly drooling at how some fonts in a competing editor seemed to have a subtle glow. I would have liked to have that in vim, and maybe it is possible. There are some other GUI improvements that could make it look/feel nicer. However, as a power user give me function over form any day. It's like the choice between taking a long, beautiful path vs a short, ugly one. Or maybe the long beautiful path can't even go where the short ugly path goes. Most of the time, I'm using my editor to get things done, and done as quickly and efficiently as possible. I'm not using it to admire how beautiful my editor looks or show its looks off to friends. If I have a choice between getting my work done in 2 seconds vs 5 minutes, I'll choose the 2 seconds. There must have been hundreds of times in my life where I've done a really complex set of editing tasks in vim (or emacs) in a couple of minutes that I know would have taken me hours and driven me insane in a traditional editor. After learning vim (and emacs) being forced to use a traditional editor is like cutting off my arms. It's like being forced to drive a car that can go only 5 miles an hour and only make 90 degree turns. Super painful and it may not even be capable of doing what you want, and certainly not quickly, efficiently, or pleasantly. Though certainly the more sophisticated traditional editors are far better than primitive traditional editors like notepad or nano (though some people still swear by those and will not even think of leaving them!). It's really hard to get across to people only used to traditional editors the sheer power that vim and emacs have. It's something that you really have to be a veteran of these editors to fully appreciate -- and that usually takes years.