4 ms·

To each their own, but you'll pry vim from my cold, dead hands :)

lproven 4y ago
I have to admit that when I went to work at Red Hat in 2014, I was seriously shocked to find multiple Vim enthusiasts, many of whom were younger than Linux itself. Although I used `vi` on SCO Xenix in 1988, I thought it had died with proprietary xNix and that only a few lunatics still used it in the 21st century -- like a few diehards still run Classic MacOS or Amigas these days. How wrong I was. It is very hard to understand people's deep affection for what to me is a crufty old piece of relatively early computing history, and possibly #2 or #3 in my personal list of Ugliest Editors I've Ever Seen. But then, TBH, xNix as a crufty old piece of early computing history, and if we lived in a sane world, it would be mostly forgotten by now, an early intermediary step on the way to some modern polished descendant of Inferno, treating datacentres as single machines, everything CPU-independent, which nobody ran on their desktop but powered lots of servers. C should be as dead as Plankalkül. Me, I'd be running a modern Acorn-made machine with BeOS, and next to it an ARM Mac running a re-engineered hybrid of LisaOS and Copland with apps written in Dylan. Maybe some strange IBM OOPS OS that grew out of Taligent for business stuff. But we don't live in a sane world. People assimilate software as culture, identifying with it, with the result that they keep re-implementing obsolete 1960s designs, ignoring their better successors, clinging to ugly hacks because they're ugly.
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  2 reasons 1. vi is not vim 2. vim has support for LSP. IOW, it's very modern compared to what you've seen.
  - lproven 4y ago
    > it's very modern compared to what you've seen. Chuckle It's really not. Here is a story I wrote in June about Vim 9. https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/30/vim_9_is_here_with/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/30/vim_9_is_here_with/ I am 100% talking about right now, the current versions that most distros ship with.

I have to admit that when I went to work at Red Hat in 2014, I was seriously shocked to find multiple Vim enthusiasts, many of whom were younger than Linux itself. Although I used `vi` on SCO Xenix in 1988, I thought it had died with proprietary xNix and that only a few lunatics still used it in the 21st century -- like a few diehards still run Classic MacOS or Amigas these days. How wrong I was. It is very hard to understand people's deep affection for what to me is a crufty old piece of relatively early computing history, and possibly #2 or #3 in my personal list of Ugliest Editors I've Ever Seen. But then, TBH, xNix as a crufty old piece of early computing history, and if we lived in a sane world, it would be mostly forgotten by now, an early intermediary step on the way to some modern polished descendant of Inferno, treating datacentres as single machines, everything CPU-independent, which nobody ran on their desktop but powered lots of servers. C should be as dead as Plankalkül. Me, I'd be running a modern Acorn-made machine with BeOS, and next to it an ARM Mac running a re-engineered hybrid of LisaOS and Copland with apps written in Dylan. Maybe some strange IBM OOPS OS that grew out of Taligent for business stuff. But we don't live in a sane world. People assimilate software as culture, identifying with it, with the result that they keep re-implementing obsolete 1960s designs, ignoring their better successors, clinging to ugly hacks because they're ugly.

P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
2 reasons 1. vi is not vim 2. vim has support for LSP. IOW, it's very modern compared to what you've seen.
- lproven 4y ago
  > it's very modern compared to what you've seen. Chuckle It's really not. Here is a story I wrote in June about Vim 9. https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/30/vim_9_is_here_with/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/30/vim_9_is_here_with/ I am 100% talking about right now, the current versions that most distros ship with.