4 ms·

How very verbose. Isn't vim designed as a terse, efficient, no-nonsense text editor? http://vim.runpaint.org/basics/saving-a-file/ http://vim.runpaint.org/basic

How very verbose. Isn't vim designed as a terse, efficient, no-nonsense text editor? http://vim.runpaint.org/basics/saving-a-file/ http://vim.runpaint.org/basics/saving-a-file/ for example, gives me several screens full of jabber, broken into Problem, Solution, and Discussion, plus the ubiquitous Needless Comment Form as on every page. All this fluff, and :w is mentioned only in a user-added comment. I don't mean to say you can't learn anything from this document, just that you could do a lot better with ':help tutorial' and maybe a googled cheatsheet. The tutorial really only takes half an hour, just like it promises.

CaptSolo 17y ago
Agree, it is too verbose. If I am using vim, I won't be looking for cookbook entry explaining simple tasks. There is probably be audience who'd benefit from the book, but does not appeal to me. I've found A Byte of VIM to be quite useful, though: http://www.swaroopch.com/notes/Vim http://www.swaroopch.com/notes/Vim
runpaint 17y ago
Thanks for the feedback. :-) :w is mentioned as a footnote because :up is more sensible in the general case, as it preserves file timestamps and saves needless disk access, the latter being particularly useful when dealing with larger buffers or working over a slow link. If somebody wants a quick answer to the question, they can just look at the Solution. If they want to understand how saving works, and its how it relates to existing mental models they have of text editors, the Discussion elaborates. This is in contrast to the "cheatsheet" approach, which does exactly what you suggest. It gives a single cryptic command, then moves on to the next example. This may be sufficient for you and I, but newer users would prefer a more cohesive explanation. Oh, and the "Needless Comment Form" was added after multiple readers requested it. Apparently people find it easier than cloning the Git repository and submitting a patch. ;-)

CaptSolo 17y ago

Agree, it is too verbose. If I am using vim, I won't be looking for cookbook entry explaining simple tasks. There is probably be audience who'd benefit from the book, but does not appeal to me. I've found A Byte of VIM to be quite useful, though: http://www.swaroopch.com/notes/Vim http://www.swaroopch.com/notes/Vim

runpaint 17y ago

Thanks for the feedback. :-) :w is mentioned as a footnote because :up is more sensible in the general case, as it preserves file timestamps and saves needless disk access, the latter being particularly useful when dealing with larger buffers or working over a slow link. If somebody wants a quick answer to the question, they can just look at the Solution. If they want to understand how saving works, and its how it relates to existing mental models they have of text editors, the Discussion elaborates. This is in contrast to the "cheatsheet" approach, which does exactly what you suggest. It gives a single cryptic command, then moves on to the next example. This may be sufficient for you and I, but newer users would prefer a more cohesive explanation. Oh, and the "Needless Comment Form" was added after multiple readers requested it. Apparently people find it easier than cloning the Git repository and submitting a patch. ;-)