4 ms·

I've tried Org+Evil a couple of times and really liked it, but missing key strokes always make me go back to Vim+Markdown. If I mistype something in Vim it's tr

I've tried Org+Evil a couple of times and really liked it, but missing key strokes always make me go back to Vim+Markdown. If I mistype something in Vim it's trivial to undo/redo to get where I need to be, but I never managed to get my head around the Emacs undo behaviour and that just scared me away.

dan-robertson 6y ago
If you don’t use undo-tree then emacs undo works like this: 1. You have a linked list of states with your current state: A->B->C->D->(E) 2. Pressing undo moves you to earlier states. Once: A->B->C->(D)->E Twice: A->B->(C)->D->E Doing anything that isn’t undoing again will add your undoings to the history: A->B->C->D->E->D->(C) So now when you undo you in some sense redo what you had preciously undone, then undo it again, then undo further. The advantage is that you never lose history by undoing. The disadvantage is that it can be confusing. Undo in region complicates this.
- corney91 6y ago
  Thanks for the explanation, that makes sense. Good to know that states A and B are still accessible, I remember thinking they'd disappeared forever. Next time I try emacs (no doubt there'll be a next time!) I'll bear this in mind.
  - aasasd 6y ago
    I'd consider using undo-tree instead. First, it might make more sense. Second, afaik Vim has about the same model (haven't used it in a while though). Undo-tree's navigation interface isn't a pinnacle of intuitiveness, however.
    - dan-robertson 6y ago
      The tree in vim is weird and hidden. Basically there is an operation to go from a state to the state from which it was derived (“up the tree”) and an operation to go forward/backward in time (of state creation), which is basically navigation in changenum space. Ie if you make some changes: A -> B -> C -> D Undo: A -> B Make some other changes: A -> B -> E Then undo takes you up the ABE chain but if you use g- and g+, you navigate through the list ABCDE
      - aasasd 6y ago
        > g- and g+ Those are the operations, yeah! They went a long way for me. I think there's also a command or a third-party addon to see the undo states, in the undo-tree spirit—but surprisingly I've never needed it.

dan-robertson 6y ago

If you don’t use undo-tree then emacs undo works like this: 1. You have a linked list of states with your current state: A->B->C->D->(E) 2. Pressing undo moves you to earlier states. Once: A->B->C->(D)->E Twice: A->B->(C)->D->E Doing anything that isn’t undoing again will add your undoings to the history: A->B->C->D->E->D->(C) So now when you undo you in some sense redo what you had preciously undone, then undo it again, then undo further. The advantage is that you never lose history by undoing. The disadvantage is that it can be confusing. Undo in region complicates this.

corney91 6y ago
Thanks for the explanation, that makes sense. Good to know that states A and B are still accessible, I remember thinking they'd disappeared forever. Next time I try emacs (no doubt there'll be a next time!) I'll bear this in mind.
- aasasd 6y ago
  I'd consider using undo-tree instead. First, it might make more sense. Second, afaik Vim has about the same model (haven't used it in a while though). Undo-tree's navigation interface isn't a pinnacle of intuitiveness, however.
  - dan-robertson 6y ago
    The tree in vim is weird and hidden. Basically there is an operation to go from a state to the state from which it was derived (“up the tree”) and an operation to go forward/backward in time (of state creation), which is basically navigation in changenum space. Ie if you make some changes: A -> B -> C -> D Undo: A -> B Make some other changes: A -> B -> E Then undo takes you up the ABE chain but if you use g- and g+, you navigate through the list ABCDE
    - aasasd 6y ago
      > g- and g+ Those are the operations, yeah! They went a long way for me. I think there's also a command or a third-party addon to see the undo states, in the undo-tree spirit—but surprisingly I've never needed it.