> AK <andrei....@gmail.com> [11-02-17 20:08]:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 02/17/2011 01:43 PM, meino.cra...@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, visithttp://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- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't find vim has affected my perception of text. I use
it extensively for two types of task, simple scripting
(Perl, awk, batch files etc) where the syntax highlighting
and formatting are key, and data & log file manipulation
where regular expressions and the ability to build complex
procedures relatively quickly are key. (I'd rather spend 15
minutes figuring out the right sequence of commands, or a
function, than manually making a repetitive series of
changes.) Neither of those involve producing a lot of text.
I also use it for miscellaneous text tasks like taking notes
or writing emails like this for Google Groups, but not for
writing documents - I use Word for that. I was using Word
before I came to vim, but it's never really occurred to me
to try and use vim instead, and now you've raised the
question in my mind, it still doesn't grab me, because I
don't think of vim as a word processor. (I'm sure there's
lots of solutions to use it as such, if you aren't already
using Word for everything, including Word templates etc.)
I'm aware of the actions for deleting/yanking words, or to
the end of the line, but I don't find I need to do anything
more advanced, or move around with text objects - I just use
the mouse, or search, or t & f commands.
I guess the answer to your question is, it hasn't had the
chance to alter my perception of text, because it doesn't
seem natural to me to use vim for word processing to produce
documents, and I don't do anything involving producing a lot
of text that doesn't also require word processing tasks. When
I'm using Word I don't find myself missing vim commands.
regards,
Geoff
--
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