4 ms·
The existence of "modes" is also opposite to the approach which is know for decades to be less prone to accidental errors: having no modes and always being able
by acqq 6y ago
The existence of "modes" is also opposite to the approach which is know for decades to be less prone to accidental errors: having no modes and always being able to perform more undo steps.
There were even the games of considering what plain text typed in wrong mode would cause the most of the damage.
The main reason Vim and Emacs have their current followers is that the competing editors on Linux or Unix platforms are significantly worse (on average), not that these two are by any means any kind of the possible optimum. And boy, is the competition worse.
(Personally, I use console editors only if I have to, and then prefer to use vim, but otherwise I prefer my customized low-footprint programmable GUI.)
- nouveaux 6y agoThe power that vim has out of the box is pretty incredible. The macro system is very easy to use and powerful. That said, it is hard to learn all these features and modern GUI IDEs are pretty amazing. You can still use vi in many of these editors.
- u801e 6y ago> The existence of "modes" is also opposite to the approach which is know for decades to be less prone to accidental errors: having no modes and always being able to perform more undo steps. vim has had the multi-level undo and redo for a number of years. If I really screw up, I can always run something like :earlier 5m to get back to the state I was at 5 minutes ago. The only problem I have with some of the normal mode keystrokes is when I want to use some of the window based shortcuts and accidently press ctrl-w while my browser window is open (which closes the tab) :)