3 ms·
I'm genuinely intrigued, what made you decide to write your own editor instead of patching the keybindings in nano?
by Denvercoder9 2y ago
I'm genuinely intrigued, what made you decide to write your own editor instead of patching the keybindings in nano?
- forgotpwd16 2y agoDon't even need patching. Could've CUA keybindings by entering them in the rc file. bind ^X cut main bind ^C copytext main bind ^V uncut main bind ^Z undo main bind ^Y redo main ... (Those are from an old rc that had around. The copytext/uncut have been renamed in newer versions.)
- le-mark 2y agoIt blows my mind that this wasn’t more widely publicized over the years. At least this is the first time I’ve seen it, and I learned vim a long time ago. Partly because if it was a choice between weird keys, may as well learn vim.
- 3836293648 2y agoThey're even in the default global config, just commented out at the bottom
- bravetraveler 2y agoIt blows my mind how many people need directed at the included documentation or config files. Sheep to slaughter. Before anyone judges me for judging, instructions-included is pretty consistent across disciplines. I'm not a mechanic but I can figure out routine maintenance/customization. I'm surprised you, and surely others, arrived at switching editors instead of changing the editor itself. Not in the source or with compilation. The configuration. I know you say partly, I just doubt there is any perfect editor. All roads lead to configuration.
- marssaxman 2y agoThat was only one of the reasons. The keybindings were the seed of the idea, but as soon I started thinking about what I would like to change, I realized that I also wanted multiple edit buffers and a directory browser. Essentially it's my all-in-one coding environment.
- p4bl0 2y agoFWIW, nano can have multiple edit buffer, just add "set multibuffer" in your .nanorc to activate this feature :).
- marssaxman 2y agoSeriously!? I had no idea. What an underappreciated bit of software nano is.