3 ms·
I can do that pretty trivially in any of three editors as well. I just did it now in about 20 seconds, just as a proof of concept. I don't get the "repeat coun
by SomeCallMeTim 13y ago
I can do that pretty trivially in any of three editors as well. I just did it now in about 20 seconds, just as a proof of concept.
I don't get the "repeat count" functionality that I know comes for free in vim, but at the same time, I rarely know HOW many lines I need to apply a macro to, and so just letting key-repeat take over until I'm almost done works for me. There are also times when the macro works on blocks of text, but there are occasional line breaks that would break the macro, and repeating until I get to a line break, skipping it, and then proceeding is easy.
When I AM in vim and I need to, for example, delete some large number of lines, I find myself trying to guess how many lines, but guess on the small size. Then I guess again, until I get close enough to see the exact number.
I probably should use "visual" mode more often for that particular task, but the point is that being able to repeat a macro an exact number of times is (for me) LESS useful than just being able to use key-repeat at 10/second until the task is done.
- Osiris 13y agoWhen I AM in vim and I need to, for example, delete some large number of lines, I find myself trying to guess how many lines, but guess on the small size. Then I guess again, until I get close enough to see the exact number. That's my biggest issue using vim, the need to count lines before every operation. I keep getting the feeling I'm doing something wrong when I do that. Sometimes I just break down and use visual selection mode to select the text and delete the whole group, much like I'd do in another editor. Is there something I'm missing about having to count before doing operations in vim?
- JulianWasTaken 13y agoUsually, yes. I never count. There's a lot of alternatives depending on what you're counting. If you're deleting a block of lines say, usually it's not just some random block, and so usually you want some more targeted motion. Like e.g. d} or d[m for an exotic example. Or d/stuff if you're lazy, like I often am. There's also `relativenumber` for when you really do need to count, but I'm ambivalent on whether I like it. And sometimes you just want `.`. It's dirty, but sometimes it's quicker. I like to basically always be typing every time I have a goal in mind. So I never want to be thinking really for too long once I've decided where I want to get. So I'll do dw... once in awhile. So yeah, it depends.
- johncoltrane 13y ago:set relativenumber shows… line numbers relative to the current line allowing you to: 1. find the last line of the block you want to operate on 2. see the number you need to use 3. use that number Motions and text-objects are very useful as well: dip da{ d{ d/foo d?bar d'a d]m …