4 ms·

These days many users of vim tend to use many plugins making it in some ways a lot like emacs. Also emacs isn't particularly inefficient on modern machines othe

by rat87 13y ago

These days many users of vim tend to use many plugins making it in some ways a lot like emacs. Also emacs isn't particularly inefficient on modern machines other then problems with the ui and single threading which I believe vim shares.

evincarofautumn 13y ago
I meant human efficiency, not the computer kind.
- Ma8ee 13y ago
  In what way is Emacs inefficient for humans?
  - danielbarla 13y ago
    My guess would be the Emacs pinky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs#Emacs_pinky http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs#Emacs_pinky As a novice Vim user who has at times wanted to try out Emacs, this has always been an irritation. I think it's telling that one of the suggested work-arounds according that article is: > Emacs' built-in "Viper-mode" that allows use of the vi key layout for basic text editing and the Emacs scheme for more advanced features.
  - regularfry 13y ago
    Try this task for an example: underline an arbitrary line of text with '=' characters. In vim that's 11 keypresses across 3 operations, possibly less if there's a shortcut I haven't thought of. How many keypresses does emacs take out of the box? Emacs, especially with paredit, is fairly well optimised for editing s-expressions and the like. Vim is very well optimised for line-based editing, but I don't get on with its buffer management at all.
    - taylanub 13y ago
      Came up with this in 10 seconds: C-a C-k C-k C-y C-y C-p C-SPC C-e M-x repl RET reg RET . RET = RET You can't really count key-presses the same way in Emacs because e.g. Ctrl+x is not the same as "x, y", and especially "Ctrl+x, Ctrl+y" is not the same at all as "x, y, z, t" because you can hold Ctrl then press x then y. Also, in the M-x repl RET reg RET bit, the "repl" and "reg" can be touch-typed naturally, which will probably be faster than hitting individual command keys, due to mental over-head and what-not (bring in the neurologists!). It's probably still a bit more finger movement than Vim's 11 keypresses, but I'd invite everyone to stop mast*rbating and be as fine with this ~20 key-press solution which came to mind in 10 seconds and takes less than 10 seconds to execute. If you want to use it often, record it as a macro and bind it to a key.
    - intractable 13y ago
      > underline an arbitrary line of text with '=' characters. In vim that's 11 keypresses across 3 operations Sounds like a vimgolf challenge to me. Here's my entry: YpVr=
      - swah 13y ago
        I'm wondering now that the creativity to come up with those things might actually be beneficial to coding.
        danielbarla 13y ago
        I'd agree with that, and also - an intense dislike of unnecessary repetition / work is definitely a good thing. I'm not sure using Vim causes that, but it definitely reinforces it. For those that are interested, I would recommend "Practical Vim", and it includes many examples (including the above one) which really accelerate the learning process: http://pragprog.com/book/dnvim/practical-vim http://pragprog.com/book/dnvim/practical-vim There are definitely cheaper alternatives (including free ones), but this book really laid the concepts out very clearly for me.
      - regularfry 13y ago
        Well, that Vr= soundly beats my :s/./=/g.

by rat87 13y ago

evincarofautumn 13y ago

I meant human efficiency, not the computer kind.

Ma8ee 13y ago
In what way is Emacs inefficient for humans?
- danielbarla 13y ago
  My guess would be the Emacs pinky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs#Emacs_pinky http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs#Emacs_pinky As a novice Vim user who has at times wanted to try out Emacs, this has always been an irritation. I think it's telling that one of the suggested work-arounds according that article is: > Emacs' built-in "Viper-mode" that allows use of the vi key layout for basic text editing and the Emacs scheme for more advanced features.
- regularfry 13y ago
  Try this task for an example: underline an arbitrary line of text with '=' characters. In vim that's 11 keypresses across 3 operations, possibly less if there's a shortcut I haven't thought of. How many keypresses does emacs take out of the box? Emacs, especially with paredit, is fairly well optimised for editing s-expressions and the like. Vim is very well optimised for line-based editing, but I don't get on with its buffer management at all.
  - taylanub 13y ago
    Came up with this in 10 seconds: C-a C-k C-k C-y C-y C-p C-SPC C-e M-x repl RET reg RET . RET = RET You can't really count key-presses the same way in Emacs because e.g. Ctrl+x is not the same as "x, y", and especially "Ctrl+x, Ctrl+y" is not the same at all as "x, y, z, t" because you can hold Ctrl then press x then y. Also, in the M-x repl RET reg RET bit, the "repl" and "reg" can be touch-typed naturally, which will probably be faster than hitting individual command keys, due to mental over-head and what-not (bring in the neurologists!). It's probably still a bit more finger movement than Vim's 11 keypresses, but I'd invite everyone to stop mast*rbating and be as fine with this ~20 key-press solution which came to mind in 10 seconds and takes less than 10 seconds to execute. If you want to use it often, record it as a macro and bind it to a key.
  - intractable 13y ago
    > underline an arbitrary line of text with '=' characters. In vim that's 11 keypresses across 3 operations Sounds like a vimgolf challenge to me. Here's my entry: YpVr=
    - swah 13y ago
      I'm wondering now that the creativity to come up with those things might actually be beneficial to coding.
      - danielbarla 13y ago
        I'd agree with that, and also - an intense dislike of unnecessary repetition / work is definitely a good thing. I'm not sure using Vim causes that, but it definitely reinforces it. For those that are interested, I would recommend "Practical Vim", and it includes many examples (including the above one) which really accelerate the learning process: http://pragprog.com/book/dnvim/practical-vim http://pragprog.com/book/dnvim/practical-vim There are definitely cheaper alternatives (including free ones), but this book really laid the concepts out very clearly for me.
    - regularfry 13y ago
      Well, that Vr= soundly beats my :s/./=/g.