Sensible default save location
-
@blakeyrat said:
What's the point of writing an advanced tool if you don't bother to make it usable?
vim is more usable than sed/awk/grep!
It does have the vertical learning curve, but once you are over the hill you pick up speed.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@superjer said:
It makes it a better editor for me. It's not a waste of time if I'm more efficient and enjoy editing text more. Tasks I would have written a script or program to complete I can often do with a few seconds of Vim-fu. Like learning any advanced tool, it might just be worth the effort.
What's the point of writing an advanced tool if you don't bother to make it usable? Just so you can sit around and be smug about how much smarter you are than everybody else? Oh wait, that is literally why you do it.
The point of making an advanced tool is to use it. What is the point of making it discoverable? So that you don't need to read the manual? Why should I care?
Discoverability is often at odds with the other dimensions of usability. You must choose. Again, why one should develop a tool that lacks on the dimensions of usability that he cares about (being productive) just because you don't want to RTFM?
By the way, I prefer emacs.
-
@blakeyrat said:
What's the point of writing an advanced tool if you don't bother to make it usable? Just so you can sit around and be smug about how much smarter you are than everybody else? Oh wait, that is literally why you do it.
Gaming analogy! Do you play Starcraft? Starcraft works an awful lot like Vim. It's even more modal than Vim. You have to press a key to just type normally, and again to go back to command mode. Based on what units you have selected, different keys do totally different things.
But in Starcraft you CAAAAAN just use the mouse to do everything. If you want to strain your mouse hand and lose a lot.
I play Starcraft a few hours a month and have managed to learn dozens of keyboard commands. As a result, I'm better at it and it's more fun! (I'm still a total noob though.)
As it happens I'm in a text editor about 40 hours a week, so, unsurprisingly, I find it's worth it to edit text like I play SC. In a high-learning-curve, initially unusable way.Now I'm going to go play Battlefield 3. What do you mean I have to learn 37 keyboard commands? Can't you just put a GUI button for "jump", and "fire", and "walk left" on the screen so I can click and so it's really USABLE and DISCOVERABLE?!?!
-
-
@superjer said:
Do you play Starcraft? Starcraft works an awful lot like Vim.
It's great when the first two sentences show how much an idiot a person is, it saves me having to rest the rest of their post.
-
I am an idiot because I play Starcraft? Or is it because I think Starcraft and Vim have similar interfaces?
I'm dying to know which!
-
@superjer said:
I am an idiot because I play Starcraft? Or is it because I think Starcraft and Vim have similar interfaces?
I'm dying to know which!
Neither. You're an idiot for bothering to respond to blakeyrat.
-
@superjer said:
Starcraft works an awful lot like Vim. It's even more modal than Vim. You have to press a key to just type normally, and again to go back to command mode. Based on what units you have selected, different keys do totally different things.
You've descended into SpectateSwamp mode now. Smelled the Swamp Shack.
You should write a randomrandom feature for vim.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@superjer said:
It makes it a better editor for me. It's not a waste of time if I'm more efficient and enjoy editing text more. Tasks I would have written a script or program to complete I can often do with a few seconds of Vim-fu. Like learning any advanced tool, it might just be worth the effort.
What's the point of writing an advanced tool if you don't bother to make it usable? Just so you can sit around and be smug about how much smarter you are than everybody else? Oh wait, that is literally why you do it.
Oh no! Some things have a steep learning curve! Suck it up, princess, it's worth it to get at the more advanced functionality.
I don't use vim, because I hate the modal editing model. I do use emacs, and it's been worth the effort to learn to use it well. There are problems (e.g. emacs lisp), but it's nowhere near as painful as using something like Eclipse.
-
@_gaffer said:
Suck it up, princess, it's worth it to get at the more advanced functionality.
I didn't think it was. And I know that it is bullshit to present the user with such an unnecessary curve with the false excuse of "it's got advanced functionality".
@_gaffer said:
I don't use vim, because I hate the modal editing model.
Oh. You agree.
Why are we arguing?
Let's go shopping!
-
@_gaffer said:
Oh no! Some things have a steep learning curve! Suck it up, princess, it's worth it to get at the more advanced functionality.
I move that if you spend the same amount of time learning, for example, Visual Studio's editor, or SublimeText, you'd be just as fast as you would be with Vim. And VS and SublimeText are approachable by anybody who happens to walk by your computer as well.
The reason Vim has a high learning curve isn't because it has more features, or advanced features, or more advanced features. It's because its developers don't give a shit about the quality of the product they are developing.
-
Wow. I know an effective trigger to use next time I want to go trolling. I asked if there were any decent text editors for Mac since Notepad++ isn't available on that platform, and we get a holy war on vim versus emacs. I suppose when someone asks you for advice when they're shopping for a new car you guys get into arguments over whether Ford or Chevy was better in the 1920's, and no real driver uses a vehicle from our century because, well, you don't and you're a real driver, therefore anyone wanting a new car is an idiot. Or something like that. I'm having trouble following this thread's logic enough to translate.
In the meantime I've finished my JSON parsing and moved on to other things.
-
@mott555 said:
There's your problem.Wow. I know an effective trigger to use next time I want to go trolling. I asked if there were any decent text editors for Mac since Notepad++ isn't available on that platform, and we get a holy war on vim versus emacs. I suppose when someone asks you for advice when they're shopping for a new car you guys get into arguments over whether Ford or Chevy was better in the 1920's, and no real driver uses a vehicle from our century because, well, you don't and you're a real driver, therefore anyone wanting a new car is an idiot. Or something like that. I'm having trouble following this thread's logic enough to translate.
In the meantime I've finished my JSON parsing and moved on to other things.
-
@mott555 said:
Wow. I know an effective trigger to use next time I want to go trolling. I asked if there were any decent text editors for Mac since Notepad++ isn't available on that platform, and we get a holy war on vim versus emacs.
Shut up! People are talking!
-
@dhromed said:
Compare to vim: as a fresh new user, it is not possible to start work without a large amount of time and sanity-recovering coke/hookers.
FTFY.
@Zemm said:
It does have the vertical learning curve, but once you are over the hill you pick up speed.
That.
It ain't for the faint-hearted, it requires significant investment to learn how it works to gain the full benefit. Don't expect an untrained novice to work it drive it unattended with any measure of success.
Godwin's third law of convergance: any thread on WTF forums will gradually approach a debate over the shittiness/power of [ Linux | Java | PHP | SSRR ] within 3 pages.
-
@blakeyrat said:
Visual Studio's editor
is complete shit. It doesn't even have current line highlight, the code folding system is useless, and the default comment/uncomment keystroke IS A CHORD*. The only reason to use VS is because it is an IDE that understands your code and your project's structure, and you can do nifty productive things with that, obviously, but by then we've devolved into the same argument as against vim: It's A Shitty Product But It Has The Features So The Shit Is Maybe Worth It.
Classic story: building features is easier than building good software.
-
@dhromed said:
@blakeyrat said:
Visual Studio's editor
is complete shit.
Does it still hide/disable line numbers by default? I always thought that was peculiar...
-
@blakeyrat said:
I move that if you spend the same amount of time learning, for example, Visual Studio's editor, or SublimeText, you'd be just as fast as you would be with Vim.
Maybe. It depending on what you're doing. For me, definitely not, because I do a lot of almost-automatable text editing.
In Vim I can say, "change the contents of the next double quotes in this unusual way, and the next, and the next, but not that one, and the next one, and ..." All in a ridiculously small number of keystrokes.
In VS's editor it would require me to hunt and click for many times longer, and I'd start making mistakes as it got tedious. Or maybe I could use a hideous regular expression in the find and replace box.
@blakeyrat said:
And VS and SublimeText are approachable by anybody who happens to walk by your computer as well.
Agreed. But that does nothing for me. I don't want people walking by to use my computer.
@blakeyrat said:
The reason Vim has a high learning curve isn't because it has more features, or advanced features, or more advanced features. It's because its developers don't give a shit about the quality of the product they are developing.
Ok. What is it Vim should do to make the learning curve lower, that wouldn't completely break what makes it efficient?
-
@superjer said:
In Vim I can say, "change the contents of the next double quotes in this unusual way, and the next, and the next, but not that one, and the next one, and ..." All in a ridiculously small number of keystrokes.
In VS's editor it would require me to hunt and click for many times longer, and I'd start making mistakes as it got tedious. Or maybe I could use a hideous regular expression in the find and replace box.
You could just use the regular Find and Replace box for that task. Just hit "Replace" when it highlights one you want to replace, and "Skip" when it doesn't. I can't believe I have to actually explain this.
@superjer said:
Ok. What is it Vim should do to make the learning curve lower, that wouldn't completely break what makes it efficient?
That's a good question, and I don't know the answer. But I wager it's probably: give up and start from scratch.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@superjer said:
In Vim I can say, "change the contents of the next double quotes in this unusual way, and the next, and the next, but not that one, and the next one, and ..." All in a ridiculously small number of keystrokes.
In VS's editor it would require me to hunt and click for many times longer, and I'd start making mistakes as it got tedious. Or maybe I could use a hideous regular expression in the find and replace box.
You could just use the regular Find and Replace box for that task. Just hit "Replace" when it highlights one you want to replace, and "Skip" when it doesn't. I can't believe I have to actually explain this.
But what if the contents of the double quotes are a bit different each time? And the change isn't just a wholesale replace?
-
@superjer said:
But what if the contents of the double quotes are a bit different each time? And the change isn't just a wholesale replace?
And what if a Martian lands on your porch and shoots you with a ray gun before Vim is done booting!?
Christ, I'm done with this forum today.
-
@superjer said:
But what if the contents of the double quotes are a bit different each time? And the change isn't just a wholesale replace?
TL;DR version: vi/vim can do regex search n replace. VS can't.
Textpad can, surprisingly. Dunno about notepad++
-
-
@blakeyrat said:
@superjer said:
But what if the contents of the double quotes are a bit different each time? And the change isn't just a wholesale replace?
And what if a Martian lands on your porch and shoots you with a ray gun before Vim is done booting!?
Yes. How silly of me. Who would ever need do any bulk text editing that isn't perfectly solved by Find n Replace?
@blakeyrat said:
Christ, I'm done with this forum today.
Oh come on, we all knew that wasn't true.
At least we can both agree that Cassidy is a moron.
-
@superjer said:
Yes. How silly of me. Who would ever need do any bulk text editing that isn't perfectly solved by Find n Replace?
What I was getting at is that your problem, AS ORIGINALLY STATED, could have been solved by find and replace. Then you CHANGE the problem and suddenly try to make my answer "wrong". Well my answer wasn't fucking wrong, it matched your question. So fuck off. I'm not going to play some stupid little kid one-upping game where you say A, and I solve it, then you say A+1, and I solve it, then you say A+2, and I solve it, etc.
The Martian thing was my brain thinking taking your line of conversation to its logical end-point would be funny and people other than me would get it, but I guess neither was the case.
@superjer said:
At least we can both agree that Cassidy is a moron.
Finally some common ground!
-
@blakeyrat said:
What I was getting at is that your problem, AS ORIGINALLY STATED, could have been solved by find and replace. Then you CHANGE the problem and suddenly try to make my answer "wrong". Well my answer wasn't fucking wrong, it matched your question. So fuck off. I'm not going to play some stupid little kid one-upping game where you say A, and I solve it, then you say A+1, and I solve it, then you say A+2, and I solve it, etc.
I think you need to re-read my problem AS ORIGINALLY STATED. I started by calling it "almost-automatable text editing," which apparently you ignored, because that would rule out Find n Replace. Then I said "change the contents of the next double quotes in this unusual way, and the next, ..." which if you notice, doesn't say the contents are the same each time (or why even mention the double quotes?) nor that the change is a wholesale replace, but rather, an "unusual" change.
-
@superjer said:
@blakeyrat said:
What I was getting at is that your problem, AS ORIGINALLY STATED, could have been solved by find and replace. Then you CHANGE the problem and suddenly try to make my answer "wrong". Well my answer wasn't fucking wrong, it matched your question. So fuck off. I'm not going to play some stupid little kid one-upping game where you say A, and I solve it, then you say A+1, and I solve it, then you say A+2, and I solve it, etc.
I think you need to re-read my problem AS ORIGINALLY STATED. I started by calling it "almost-automatable text editing," which apparently you ignored, because that would rule out Find n Replace. Then I said "change the contents of the next double quotes in this
unusual way, and the next, ..." which if you notice, doesn't say the contents are the same each time (or why even mention the double quotes?) nor that the change is a wholesale replace, but rather, an "unusual" change.Ok, seriously, give a concrete example.
Right now, your challenge is way too vague to ever read as anything more credible than "Vim can do shit VS can't. I swear it's true, and I totally had an example of it this one time".
Your problem, AS ORIGINALLY STATED, is hand-wavey bullshit.
-
@superjer said:
I think you need to re-read my problem AS ORIGINALLY STATED. I started by calling it "almost-automatable text editing," which apparently you ignored, because that would rule out Find n Replace. Then I said "change the contents of the next double quotes in this
unusual way, and the next, ..." which if you notice, doesn't say the contents are the same each time (or why even mention the double quotes?) nor that the change is a wholesale replace, but rather, <b?an "unusual" change.You're using them...funny characters, aren't you?
-
@_gaffer said:
Ok, seriously, give a concrete example.
Right now, your challenge is way too vague to ever read as anything more credible than "Vim can do shit VS can't. I swear it's true, and I totally had an example of it this one time".
Your problem, AS ORIGINALLY STATED, is hand-wavey bullshit.
It wasn't a challenge. I use both VS and Vim and they both do things the other doesn't. Do I really have to argue that?
I was trying to avoid too much detail in an example because it's easy to get bogged down, and they always sound contrived, but I'll try anyway, just for you:
I want to change the case of the underlined letters in the following text:
Lorem "Ipsum dolor" sit amet, "consectetur adipiscing elit".
Aenean "vitae tortor" "sed" nisl "lobortis ultrices".
Nullam ac "libero ut" est feugiat commodo id ut elit.
Nunc "augue est", tempor a "sollicitudin non", sollicitudin ac justo.
Vestibulum erat lorem, "ultrices at suscipit" ac, "laoreet eu" felis.I recorded my keystrokes in Vim, and this is what I typed:
/ "<Enter>qqww~ww~nqnnn@q@@n@@n@@
At that point if the file goes on for ten more pages I can just keep hitting n and @@ to go through and fix all of them in seconds.
The keystrokes all in a row look really cryptic, but it would be just as bad in any other editor:
<Control-F> "<Click><Enter><Right><Delete>I<Right><Right><Right><Right><Right><Delete>D<F3><F3><F3><Click and drag>L<Click and drag>U<F3>...
(That gets the first two of them)
-
Whoops. ipsum should have an undeline. I blame CS.
-
@superjer said:
You mean you weren't editing your reply in vi?Whoops. ipsum should have an undeline. I blame CS.
-
Hey look! A ridiculously contrived example!
-
@blakeyrat said:
Hey look! A ridiculously contrived example!
That was my point. Every task that can't be completed with a Find n Replace or a few seconds of clicking is going to look contrived. But those are the tasks I have to do.
Notice that it isn't a problem that it's contrived, because my point isn't that vim has a special feature to do this one thing. I only used basic operations which could be reordered to complete a huge class of tasks.
Real tasks I actually need to do, quickly.
Anyway, my example is a much-simplified version of something I did for reals earlier.
-
-
@blakeyrat said:
@superjer said:
But those are the tasks I have to do.
I don't believe you.
You never do any text editing that's tedious but still requires your attention?
How odd.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@Cassidy said:
TL;DR version: vi/vim can do regex search n replace. I don't know if VS can.
Hastily edited that as a thinly-veiled but failed attempt to save face.
Sideways Q: when did VS had regex support? I know a .net bod was excitedly telling me about VB getting regex.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@superjer said:
At least we can both agree that Cassidy is a moron.
Finally some common ground!
MY MORAN BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER
-
@Cassidy said:
Sideways Q: when did VS had regex support?
2005 is the oldest one I have installed, and it has it.
-
@superjer said:
You never do any text editing that's tedious but still requires your attention?
What, like programming?
I don't search & replace on a daily basis, obviously. I have to write code.
-
@Cassidy said:
Hastily edited that as a thinly-veiled but failed attempt to save face.
Hey! Here's a thought! Maybe next time not spout bullshit in the first place? There's enough bullshit in this world without you barfing up your own variety into every thread.
@Cassidy said:
Sideways Q: when did VS had regex support?
Always? Or at least, as long as I've used it.
@Cassidy said:
I know a .net bod was excitedly telling me about VB getting regex.
Hasn't reading this forum taught you that people are fucking idiots? Why are you trusting a fucking idiot to tell you what features a product has? Look for yourself. You fucking idiot.
-
@superjer said:
You never do any text editing that's tedious but still requires your attention?
Not in the form of "I have a bunch of strings in quotes and they all need to be title case but some of them aren't." I think that comes up, oh, about... say... never. If that's the kind of task you find yourself doing often, you need to go back to your previous step and say to yourself, "whoa, where did I go wrong, because this is stupid". As I said in my post's tag you probably didn't read.
So that leaves two alternatives: you either contrived a crazy example, or you're an idiot surrounded by unfixed WTFs. I picked the more generous one.
Let me be clear: I'm talking about the text editor being better for ACTUALLY EDITING TEXT IN A WAY ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS DO. If you want super wank around wasting time solving retarded text-editing trivia program, than maybe Vim's a good choice. But that's not what I'm talking about.
-
I program Go in vim. To save, it's :w . To close a document, :q . Reformatting all my code and validating syntax? :Fmt .
I have yet to find a graphical editor that lets me write code without taking my hands off the keyboard.
-
@blakeyrat said:
I'm talking about the text editor being better for ACTUALLY EDITING TEXT IN A WAY ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS DO.
Like typing?
vim got that feature recently, I think. You need a command to enable it.
-
@dhromed said:
It's "a"@blakeyrat said:
I'm talking about the text editor being better for ACTUALLY EDITING TEXT IN A WAY ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS DO.
Like typing?
vim got that feature recently, I think. You need a command to enable it.
-
@Ben L. said:
To close a document, :q
In that vein: it would be so cool if my keyboard had a standard key for closing a document or application. Ctrl|Alt+F4 is technically keyboard, but it's not super handy.
-
@Ben L. said:
I have yet to find a graphical editor that lets me write code without taking my hands off the keyboard.
Which ones have you tried?
Seriously. I want to see if you're a moron for not learning keyboard shortcuts in other editors, or if you're a moron for trying a really shitty one and just declaring they're all the same. It's important that I call you a moron for the right reason!
-
@Ben L. said:
I have yet to find a graphical editor that lets me write code without taking my hands off the keyboard.
I have to take my hands off the keyboard to smack the "esc" key.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@Ben L. said:
I have yet to find a graphical editor that lets me write code without taking my hands off the keyboard.
Which ones have you tried?
Seriously. I want to see if you're a moran for not learning keyboard shortcuts in other editors, or if you're a moran for trying a really shitty one and just declaring they're all the same. It's important that I call you a moran for the right reason!
Notepad Visual Studio 2005 Express (VB) Programmers' Notepad Notepad++ Gedit Kate Visual Studio 2010 Express (C++) KDevelop Code::Blocks NetBeans Eclipse IntelliJ IDEA nano
All of these either didn't have code formatting or required more than two keys at once or worse yet, clicking.
-
Moron.
@Ben L. said:
required more than two keys at once
Wait, what? Is that a "thing" now? Did those goalposts just saunter on down the field?
-
@blakeyrat said:
@superjer said:
You never do any text editing that's tedious but still requires your attention?
Not in the form of "I have a bunch of strings in quotes and they all need to be title case but some of them aren't."
I already specifically said that my point was NOT that Vim has a special feature to do that. Because it doesn't.
@blakeyrat said:
I think that comes up, oh, about... say... never. If that's the kind of task you find yourself doing often, you need to go back to your previous step and say to yourself, "whoa, where did I go wrong, because this is stupid". As I said in my post's tag you probably didn't read.
I did read it. This particular task has come up once for me, and never for you. Which doesn't change anything because my point is Vim is great at solving tedious editing tasks. Like any of them.
@blakeyrat said:
So that leaves two alternatives: you either contrived a crazy example, or you're an idiot surrounded by unfixed WTFs.
You can't think of any other situation where you might need to make lots of small, related edits in different places? It just isn't uncommon. No matter what you say.
And who isn't surrounded by WTFs?
@blakeyrat said:
I picked the more generous one.
Let me be clear: I'm talking about the text editor being better for ACTUALLY EDITING TEXT IN A WAY ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS DO. If you want super wank around wasting time solving retarded text-editing trivia program, than maybe Vim's a good choice. But that's not what I'm talking about.
As AN ACTUAL HUMAN BEING I often make mistakes and need to go back and correct them. I also work with ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS, and we get a lot of data/code from places that employ ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS (or so I'm told.)
Personally, I'm not a fan of frequently reaching for the mouse to try to precisely click on tiny characters. A lot of other people aren't either, because I see them instead holding down arrow keys and just... waiting for the cursor. In Vim I can just say "go to the next x character", "select the text inside the quotes" or "let's change the conditional" and my favorite, "do it again". Kind of like I'm back-seat coding over someone's shoulder, but less awkward.
