7 ms·

You'll need to provide explicit examples of where any of those operations requires more keystrokes in vim than any other editor - I can't think of any. You're

by aidos 13y ago

You'll need to provide explicit examples of where any of those operations requires more keystrokes in vim than any other editor - I can't think of any. You're calling vim commands "modes" to deliberately make it sound more complex than it is. I want to change to next 3 words. I type 'c3w' - you're saying that's modal - which it sort of vaugly is. I could have done 'v3w' to highlight the next 3 words (something you would do in any other editor). Then I hit 's' to substitute them for something else. No mode involved (other than the selection - which is the same for any editor). I stand by my assertions - it's up to you to provide the counter examples to back up your claims.

klibertp 13y ago
Actually, having numerical prefixes to commands is not a feature constrained to modal editors. In something like Notepad, to replace three next words, you need to press shift+ctrl and hit right arrow three times, then just start typing. The only inefficient thing here is a repetition of left arrow, and it's solved in Emacs, where to do the same, you'd press Ctrl+3 Ctrl+<right> and then started typing (if you have delete-selection-mode enabled). So it's very similar to <esc>c3w in terms of complexity, really. On the other hand - I don't quite understand what lutusp means by "modes" - by what he writes here, I'd say that Emacs enters "command mode" after pressing (for example) C-u in exactly the same way Vim does after <esc>. Actually any editor with commands bound to key sequences can be said to be modal in the light of what he writes. And Shift+Right and then writing something is a command bound to a sequence of keystrokes, which means I'm using a modal editor right now, writing in a textarea in Chrome. I don't think that's what lutusp wanted to say, though.
lutusp 13y ago
> You're calling vim commands "modes" to deliberately make it sound more complex than it is. * I am moving the cursor, but I want to enter text. To do so, I need to enter colon, i, Enter, then my first text entry. * I am entering text, but I want to move the cursor. To do so, I need to type Esc, Esc, then commence moving the cursor. * If while entering text, I want to do something besides move the cursor, I need to type Esc, colon, then a command letter, then its arguments. I don't need to "make it sound more complicated than it is." It is in fact more complicated -- more complicated than Apple Writer, now justly consigned to a museum, and more complicated than any modern editor. > I type 'c3w' - you're saying that's modal - which it sort of vaugly is. This is getting comical. > I could have done 'v3w' to highlight the next 3 words (something you would do in any other editor). No, in any other modern editor, I wold pass the mouse cursor across the desired characters, thus selecting them (any subset of characters or words or paragraphs, and very, very fast). There's a reason the mouse was invented, and it wasn't because it's a cute but insubstantial gimmick meant to pander to the tastes of ignorant, unsophisticated computer users. In Android, I would swipe my finger across the desired text. No mouse needed. > I stand by my assertions ... Try moving beyond assertions -- try locating some evidence, as I have just done. Pretend to be a scientist. > it's up to you to provide the counter examples to back up your claims. As I have been doing since this thread started? Read my posts.
- aidos 13y ago
  Vim has changed a lot since when you were using vi or your memories are off - either way your descriptions are inaccurate. They lead to the explanation of the miscommunication about modes though. You don't type ':i' to get to insert mode, you just hit 'i'. You don't hit Esc, Esc - it's just Esc (though lots of people remap it to 'jj'). Really these are the two modes I was referring to - you need to move between them, yes, but you'll always be in normal mode except for times you're inserting a bit of text. The way you describe using it is the mindset of everyone who first starts using vim and wants to stay in insert mode. I started that way - but it's not the way vim is used. It's the first thing beginners have to understand - normal mode is where you'll spend almost all of your time. I don't understand what's comical about 'c3w' - "Change 3 Words". You know what's comical? Reaching for the mouse to highlight 3 words to change. Though, you can make that choice - vim supports the mouse too these days. I used it when I first started on vim - it was a bad idea as it's so much slower than using the commands. Again, I stand by my assertions; Vim is faster and more powerful - other editors are easier to learn. You still haven't provided a shred of evidence to the contrary. I think your condescending tone is really unhelpful. I've given you the time and respect you deserved to address each of your comments. It would be honourable of you to treat me in the same way.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > Vim has changed a lot ... I just crafted the above example using the current vim. No memory required. Vim still imitates vi, and vi still imitates 1970. Extremely inefficient, steep learning curve in order not to press readily available control keys. > I don't understand what's comical about 'c3w' - "Change 3 Words". First, if you happen to be entering text beforehand, the number of characters required to select three words isn't three, it's five. Second, it's comical in modern times because there are much easier ways to select an arbitrary number of words, readily available ways, ways that don't cost any more than vim does, ways that are available on the machines owned by vim's advocates -- excuse me, living advocates. Machines that have keyboards with control keys. On a modern machine, if I want to select three words, or 2 1/2 words, or 3 1/2 paragraphs, I glide the mouse cursor across the desired text. And to do so, I don't have to enter a special mouse mode first. This conversation is funny for the same reasons that a conversation about a horseless carriage is funny. No, there's no miniature horse hidden in there -- they did away with the horse entirely. I know it sounds fantastic.

by aidos 13y ago

klibertp 13y ago

Actually, having numerical prefixes to commands is not a feature constrained to modal editors. In something like Notepad, to replace three next words, you need to press shift+ctrl and hit right arrow three times, then just start typing. The only inefficient thing here is a repetition of left arrow, and it's solved in Emacs, where to do the same, you'd press Ctrl+3 Ctrl+<right> and then started typing (if you have delete-selection-mode enabled). So it's very similar to <esc>c3w in terms of complexity, really. On the other hand - I don't quite understand what lutusp means by "modes" - by what he writes here, I'd say that Emacs enters "command mode" after pressing (for example) C-u in exactly the same way Vim does after <esc>. Actually any editor with commands bound to key sequences can be said to be modal in the light of what he writes. And Shift+Right and then writing something is a command bound to a sequence of keystrokes, which means I'm using a modal editor right now, writing in a textarea in Chrome. I don't think that's what lutusp wanted to say, though.

lutusp 13y ago

> You're calling vim commands "modes" to deliberately make it sound more complex than it is. * I am moving the cursor, but I want to enter text. To do so, I need to enter colon, i, Enter, then my first text entry. * I am entering text, but I want to move the cursor. To do so, I need to type Esc, Esc, then commence moving the cursor. * If while entering text, I want to do something besides move the cursor, I need to type Esc, colon, then a command letter, then its arguments. I don't need to "make it sound more complicated than it is." It is in fact more complicated -- more complicated than Apple Writer, now justly consigned to a museum, and more complicated than any modern editor. > I type 'c3w' - you're saying that's modal - which it sort of vaugly is. This is getting comical. > I could have done 'v3w' to highlight the next 3 words (something you would do in any other editor). No, in any other modern editor, I wold pass the mouse cursor across the desired characters, thus selecting them (any subset of characters or words or paragraphs, and very, very fast). There's a reason the mouse was invented, and it wasn't because it's a cute but insubstantial gimmick meant to pander to the tastes of ignorant, unsophisticated computer users. In Android, I would swipe my finger across the desired text. No mouse needed. > I stand by my assertions ... Try moving beyond assertions -- try locating some evidence, as I have just done. Pretend to be a scientist. > it's up to you to provide the counter examples to back up your claims. As I have been doing since this thread started? Read my posts.

aidos 13y ago
Vim has changed a lot since when you were using vi or your memories are off - either way your descriptions are inaccurate. They lead to the explanation of the miscommunication about modes though. You don't type ':i' to get to insert mode, you just hit 'i'. You don't hit Esc, Esc - it's just Esc (though lots of people remap it to 'jj'). Really these are the two modes I was referring to - you need to move between them, yes, but you'll always be in normal mode except for times you're inserting a bit of text. The way you describe using it is the mindset of everyone who first starts using vim and wants to stay in insert mode. I started that way - but it's not the way vim is used. It's the first thing beginners have to understand - normal mode is where you'll spend almost all of your time. I don't understand what's comical about 'c3w' - "Change 3 Words". You know what's comical? Reaching for the mouse to highlight 3 words to change. Though, you can make that choice - vim supports the mouse too these days. I used it when I first started on vim - it was a bad idea as it's so much slower than using the commands. Again, I stand by my assertions; Vim is faster and more powerful - other editors are easier to learn. You still haven't provided a shred of evidence to the contrary. I think your condescending tone is really unhelpful. I've given you the time and respect you deserved to address each of your comments. It would be honourable of you to treat me in the same way.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > Vim has changed a lot ... I just crafted the above example using the current vim. No memory required. Vim still imitates vi, and vi still imitates 1970. Extremely inefficient, steep learning curve in order not to press readily available control keys. > I don't understand what's comical about 'c3w' - "Change 3 Words". First, if you happen to be entering text beforehand, the number of characters required to select three words isn't three, it's five. Second, it's comical in modern times because there are much easier ways to select an arbitrary number of words, readily available ways, ways that don't cost any more than vim does, ways that are available on the machines owned by vim's advocates -- excuse me, living advocates. Machines that have keyboards with control keys. On a modern machine, if I want to select three words, or 2 1/2 words, or 3 1/2 paragraphs, I glide the mouse cursor across the desired text. And to do so, I don't have to enter a special mouse mode first. This conversation is funny for the same reasons that a conversation about a horseless carriage is funny. No, there's no miniature horse hidden in there -- they did away with the horse entirely. I know it sounds fantastic.