It's neat to see that nano supports customization at this level, and I can see the appeal for quickly editing files (though there are superior tools for even th

It's neat to see that nano supports customization at this level, and I can see the appeal for quickly editing files (though there are superior tools for even that nowadays, as mentioned in this thread), or if you're just getting familiar with text-mode editing, but I couldn't take anyone seriously if they _prefer_ it for programming. For one, the modal interface is so much superior to traditional key chords. It allows you to efficiently manipulate text and move the cursor, without twisting your hand in awkward positions, and remembering an endless amount of arbitrary chords. Emacs is the worst offender at this, and while it's my editor of choice, I couldn't imagine using it without evil-mode. Vim's default bindings are semantically significant, and naturally invite exploration. `c` is for `change`, `d` is for `delete`, `s` is for `substitute`, `w` is for `word`, etc. There are a limited amount of these that can be quickly learned, but the power comes when you combine them. *D*elete un*t*il the period becomes `dt.` *D*elete *i*nside parens becomes `di)`. Etc. Doing this without a modal interface becomes a chore of repeating key presses, or pressing some obscure combination of keys. Also, nano lacks any sort of plugin system. This means there's no LSP integration, file system or project exploration, running actions on save, etc. I don't blame it; if it had all those things it probably wouldn't be called _nano_... I'm a firm believer of using the tool you enjoy using, but it needs to be the right tool for the job. Use nano for its intended purpose, but if you edit text for a living, take the time to learn more advanced tools that will ultimately make your job easier.