> On 02/17/2011 01:43 PM, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >first of all: My interest and/or question, which let me post here, is
> >neither intended as the initial spark for a flame war nor as anything
> >_against_ someone or something. May be it is a kind of "exploring the
> >psychology of the vim human". And: English isn't my mothers tongue --
> >anything sounding harsh, badly or negatively results only from this --
> >it is by far NOT my intention!
> >
> >The start of all this was the observation, that there are many
> >editors out there, which are rated differently and often on a
> >scale from totally bad to fantastic. Every kind of review result
> >seems to exist.
> >
> >But with vim it seems (at least to me) a little different: Either
> >you hate it or you love it and will not touch anything else your whole
> >life long (I am exeggerating only a _little_ bit ;) )
> >
> >The reason for this observation -- the polarization into mainly two
> >groups
> >of people -- seems not only based on the properties of vim alone.
> >
> >I think (read: "I dont know for sure...") that there is a certain kind
> >of perception of text and/or handling of text by vim people, which
> >matches perfextly the way of text usage and presentation by vim
> >itsself.
> >
> >May be I am totally wrong here -- so please understand this as a
> >big question mark ... I am just only driven by curiosity.
> >
> >Is there a certain perception of text and text handling by vim people
> >which may be distintive different from people who definetly dont like
> >vim?
> >
> >And again: May question does not indent to judge over "the better way
> >of the perception of text" !!!
> >
> >Is there a kind of vim psychology??? ;)
> >
> >I am interested in answers as I am interested in questions... :)
> >
> >Best regards,
> >mcc
> >
> >
>
> For me, initially it was the observation that if you have
> a series of editing commands to do, it's very inefficient
> to have only a single mode. In other words, let's suppose you
> it's 15 editing commands to be done in a row:
>
> modal editor: <esc> 15 keystrokes or so <back to insert mode>
>
> non-modal (but powerful) editor like emacs: 15 keystrokes +
> 15 "escapes" like ctrl-x or whatever.
>
> Therefore, you spend nearly twice the work to do the same
> task, whenever you can combine many editing commands in
> a row.
>
> In effect, what happens is that in a non-modal editor you
> end up working in a more inefficient way because "smarter"
> combinations of commands are too complex/verbose. Go to
> the open bracket in current line? In vim I'll do f(, in
> a non-modal editor I'll most likely just hold arrow key
> until I get there.
>
> More commands means you can stay on homerow
> for all editing tasks.
>
> In the end, it's a question of initial investment of
> learning time for a payoff of efficiency in the future.
> If I'm a warehouse manager and I spend 5 minutes a day
> typing, it would be bizarre to learn vim (except as
> a fun / hobby project). If I'm a writer or a programmer
> and I edit for hours every day, it'd be equally bizarre
> not to learn a modal editor.
>
> -Rainyday
>
>
> --
> You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
> Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
> For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
>
Hi Rainyday,
the same here... ! :)
But my question more aimed more in the direction of text perception:
Does vim influences the way you recognizes text? Or the other way
round: Does you choose vim as your editor, because you may recognize
text in a different way as for example Microsoft Word users do?
Personally while using vim for about three (?) years now, I myself
tend to believe that text does become something more comparable to
what one can build from LEGO(tm) bricks than from - for examply -
clay over the time.
Best regards,
mcc
--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
No comments:
Post a Comment