Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #35640 > unrolled thread

New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? mogul <morten.guldager@gmail.com> - 2012-12-27 12:01 -0800
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? ian douglas <ian.douglas@iandouglas.com> - 2012-12-27 12:13 -0800
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Daniel Fetchinson <fetchinson@googlemail.com> - 2012-12-27 21:16 +0100
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2012-12-27 20:23 +0000
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? peter <pjmakey2@gmail.com> - 2012-12-27 17:14 -0300
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-12-27 15:57 -0500
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Walter Hurry <walterhurry@lavabit.com> - 2012-12-27 21:16 +0000
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2012-12-27 15:25 -0600
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2012-12-27 14:28 -0700
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2012-12-27 14:29 -0700
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Modulok <modulok@gmail.com> - 2012-12-27 16:30 -0700
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2012-12-28 10:37 +1100
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-12-28 10:41 +1100
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? "TommyVee" <xxxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xxx> - 2012-12-27 20:09 -0500
      Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2012-12-27 20:37 -0500
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-12-28 04:15 +0000
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Jamie Paul Griffin <jamie@kode5.net> - 2012-12-28 06:51 +0000
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Yuvraj Sharma <aleastech@gmail.com> - 2012-12-28 01:37 -0800
      Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Jamie Paul Griffin <jamie@kode5.net> - 2012-12-30 14:15 +0000
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2013-01-02 18:36 +0000
          Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Matty Sarro <msarro@gmail.com> - 2013-01-02 13:47 -0500
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Andrew Berg <bahamutzero8825@gmail.com> - 2012-12-28 03:52 -0600
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-12-28 21:05 +1100
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Kwpolska <kwpolska@gmail.com> - 2012-12-28 11:27 +0100
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? gst <g.starck@gmail.com> - 2012-12-28 04:08 -0800
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? python培训 <51mmj.com@gmail.com> - 2012-12-28 06:15 -0800
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Westley Martínez <anikom15@gmail.com> - 2012-12-28 18:02 -0800
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-12-29 17:40 +1100
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Monte Milanuk <memilanuk@gmail.com> - 2012-12-29 09:44 -0800
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-12-30 05:07 +1100
      Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2012-12-29 14:52 -0500
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Monte Milanuk <memilanuk@gmail.com> - 2012-12-29 12:51 -0800
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-12-30 08:21 +1100
          Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2012-12-29 16:52 -0500
            Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> - 2012-12-29 17:10 -0500
            Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-12-30 09:30 +1100
              Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-01-01 03:55 +0000
                Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-01-01 15:20 +1100
            Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> - 2012-12-29 17:40 -0500
            Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-12-30 10:16 +1100
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2013-01-02 18:43 +0000
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-12-29 18:50 +0000
      Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> - 2012-12-29 15:38 -0900
      Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-12-30 11:54 +1100
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> - 2012-12-29 14:00 -0500
      Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-01-01 03:46 +0000
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2013-01-01 21:12 +1100
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2013-01-01 08:23 -0600
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> - 2013-01-01 13:43 -0500
          Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-01-01 14:02 -0500
            Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> - 2013-01-01 14:32 -0500
            Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Wayne Werner <wayne@waynewerner.com> - 2013-01-02 21:17 -0600
            Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> - 2013-01-02 22:48 -0500
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2013-01-02 14:33 -0700
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> - 2013-01-02 17:48 -0500
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Wayne Werner <wayne@waynewerner.com> - 2013-01-02 20:37 -0600
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Gisle Vanem <gvanem@broadpark.no> - 2013-01-03 10:59 +0100
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam@whitemice.org> - 2012-12-31 06:57 -0500
      Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Hans Mulder <hansmu@xs4all.nl> - 2012-12-31 13:35 +0100
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2013-01-01 09:46 +1100
          Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2013-01-04 09:34 +0200
            Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-01-05 02:34 +1100
            Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2013-01-04 10:59 -0600
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-01-01 09:54 +1100
        Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? xDog Walker <thudfoo@gmail.com> - 2012-12-31 16:13 -0800
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? jussij@zeusedit.com - 2013-01-01 16:12 -0800
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Ramchandra Apte <maniandram01@gmail.com> - 2013-01-01 21:10 -0800
      Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? Wayne Werner <wayne@waynewerner.com> - 2013-01-02 21:20 -0600
    Re: New to python, do I need an IDE or is vim still good enough? jrodkeyjr@gmail.com - 2013-01-04 08:28 -0800

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#36004

On 2012-12-29, Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> wrote:
> emacs will parse that, highlight the filenames and line numbers
> and if I type M-`, it'll take me to the line of the next error
> (including opening the file if it's not already open).
>
> I assume other smart editors have similar capabilities.
> Different tools have different combinations of these, or
> slightly different implementations.  Find one you like and
> learn all of it's capabilities.  It makes a huge difference in
> how productive you are.

I used that power all the time writing C and C++ code. It felt
indespensable. But even though I can do the same with Python, it
doesn't feel crucial when writing Python. The errors are more
few. ;)

-- 
Neil Cerutti

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35764

On 2012-12-27, mogul <morten.guldager@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm new to python, got 10-20 years perl and C experience, all gained
> on unix alike machines hacking happily in vi, and later on in vim.
>
> Now it's python, and currently mainly on my kubuntu desktop.
>
> Do I really need a real IDE, as the windows guys around me say I do,

No.

> or will vim, git, make and other standalone tools make it the next 20
> years too for me? 

I've been writing Python programs for 10-12 years, and I use the same
"IDE" I use for everything else:  Emacs, svn/git/whatever and a command line.

I do use the "meld" visual diff program quite a bit...

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! As President I have
                                  at               to go vacuum my coin
                              gmail.com            collection!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35794

* Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> [121229 10:02]:
> On 2012-12-27, mogul <morten.guldager@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > I'm new to python, got 10-20 years perl and C experience, all gained
> > on unix alike machines hacking happily in vi, and later on in vim.
> >
> > Now it's python, and currently mainly on my kubuntu desktop.
> >
> > Do I really need a real IDE, as the windows guys around me say I do,
> 
> No.
> 
> > or will vim, git, make and other standalone tools make it the next 20
> > years too for me? 
 
  I've been using vim for 12 years now. And it works pretty good for
  me as an "IDE". I've written a lot of vimscripts to make vim
  better do my bidding and made generous use of contributed scripts.

  I see no reason to think that I would be more productive using
  anything else, but that is just me.

  Along the way, I did use emacs as well and ended doing quite a bit
  of elisping.

  Elisp does have the advantage of asynchronously running the
  interpereter inside of the editor.... Just one thing that I
  wouldn't mind seeing in vim.....

  I do find vim a bit more nimble than emacs, but each to his/her
  own. It's wonderful to have all of the choices.

  """
  They'll take away my vim when they pry it from my cold, dead
  fingers.
  """
-- 
Tim 
tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35795

On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> wrote:
> Along the way, I did use emacs as well and ended doing quite a bit
>   of elisping.

elispsis. n. the intentional omission of unnecessary work which can be
inferred by the editor; often indicated with three consecutive
parentheses ((( )))

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35765

On 12/29/2012 12:44 PM, Monte Milanuk wrote:
> Maybe its because I'm still  just a hobbyist when it comes to coding, but I spend far more time 
'thinking' about what I'm doing than typing things in... so shaving a 
few seconds here and there are less important to me.


I think the general idea is that with editors like Vim you don't get
distracted by having to do some kind of an editor task, letting you keep
your full attention on the code logic. For instance, if I need to change
a block inside parens, I type ci) (stands for change inside parens),
while with a regular editor I'd have to do it manually and by the time
I'm done, I'd forget the bigger picture of what I'm doing with the code.
Another example: >ap stands for "indent a paragraph (separated by blank
lines)". And there are many dozens if not hundreds such commands that
let you stay focused on the logic of your code.

The trade-off, of course, is that you have to remember all (or most) of
the commands, but I figured if I spend the next 20-30+ years programming
in some version of Vim, it's well worth the initial investment.

By the way, to help me remember the commands, I wrote a small script
that lets me type in a few characters of a command or its description
and filters out the list of matching commands. It really helps,
especially when I change a lot of my mappings.

  - mitya


-- 
Lark's Tongue Guide to Python: http://lightbird.net/larks/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35873

On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 14:00:23 -0500, Mitya Sirenef wrote:

> I think the general idea is that with editors like Vim you don't get
> distracted by having to do some kind of an editor task, letting you keep
> your full attention on the code logic. For instance, if I need to change
> a block inside parens, I type ci) (stands for change inside parens),
> while with a regular editor I'd have to do it manually and by the time
> I'm done, I'd forget the bigger picture of what I'm doing with the code.

See, by the time I remembered what obscure (to me) command to type, or 
searched the help files and the Internet, I'd have forgotten what the 
hell it was I was trying to do. Well, almost. My memory is not quite that 
bad, but it would certainly be a much bigger disruption to my coding than 
just doing the edit by hand.

I do love the power of command line tools, but I think that for rich 
applications like editors, the interface is so clunky that I'd rather use 
a less-powerful editor, and do more editing manually, than try to 
memorize "hundreds" of commands.

With a GUI app, I can run the mouse over the menus and see a high-level 
overview of everything the app can do in a matter of a second or two. 
(Perhaps three or five seconds if the app over-uses hierarchical menus.) 
But with a text interface, commands are much less discoverable. I can 
also use *spacial* memory to zero in on commands much more easily than 
verbal memory -- I have no idea whether the command I want is called 
"Spam" or "Ham" or "Tinned Bully Beef", but I know it's in the top 
quarter of the "Lunch" menu, and I will recognise it when I see it.

On the other hand, it's a lot harder to use a GUI app over a slow SSH 
connection to a remote machine in a foreign country over a flaky link 
than it is to use a command line or text-interface app.


> Another example: >ap stands for "indent a paragraph (separated by blank
> lines)". And there are many dozens if not hundreds such commands that
> let you stay focused on the logic of your code.

Ah yes, the famous "a for indent" mnemonic. *wink*


> The trade-off, of course, is that you have to remember all (or most) of
> the commands, but I figured if I spend the next 20-30+ years programming
> in some version of Vim, it's well worth the initial investment.
> 
> By the way, to help me remember the commands, I wrote a small script
> that lets me type in a few characters of a command or its description
> and filters out the list of matching commands. It really helps,
> especially when I change a lot of my mappings.

It seems to me, that by the time I would have searched for the right 
command to use, decided which of the (multiple) matching commands is the 
right one, then used the command, it would have been quicker and less 
distracting to have just done the editing by hand. But now I'm just 
repeating myself.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35881

On 01Jan2013 03:46, Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
| On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 14:00:23 -0500, Mitya Sirenef wrote:
| > [...] For instance, if I need to change
| > a block inside parens, I type ci) (stands for change inside parens),
| > while with a regular editor I'd have to do it manually and by the time
| > I'm done, I'd forget the bigger picture of what I'm doing with the code.
| 
| See, by the time I remembered what obscure (to me) command to type, or 
| searched the help files and the Internet, I'd have forgotten what the 
| hell it was I was trying to do.

Well, the idea is that your fingers become familiar with the core
commands. An issue of practice. The more complex vi commands are usually
composed from smaller pieces, so the learning curve isn't as steep as it
initially appears. Eg "%" jumps to that matching bracket. And
_therefore_, "c%" changes all text from here to the matching bracket.
There's a whole host of these.

| With a GUI app, I can run the mouse over the menus and see a high-level 
| overview of everything the app can do in a matter of a second or two. 

Well, there is GVim, a GNome X11 interface to vim. I imagine it would
offer that kind of mode.

| (Perhaps three or five seconds if the app over-uses hierarchical menus.) 
| But with a text interface, commands are much less discoverable. I can 
| also use *spacial* memory to zero in on commands much more easily than 
| verbal memory -- I have no idea whether the command I want is called 
| "Spam" or "Ham" or "Tinned Bully Beef", but I know it's in the top 
| quarter of the "Lunch" menu, and I will recognise it when I see it.

I must admit I find Apple's "help" search box neat this way - you can
type a keyword is it will actually find the menu item for you. Not that
I use this for vi, of course...

| > Another example: >ap stands for "indent a paragraph (separated by blank
| > lines)". And there are many dozens if not hundreds such commands that
| > let you stay focused on the logic of your code.
| 
| Ah yes, the famous "a for indent" mnemonic. *wink*

No, ">" is indent: it means shift-right. For Python you'd set the
shiftwidth to 4 (well, I use 2). But again, that's a grammar. Like the
"change" example above it is ">" followed by a cursor motion. So I'm
quite fond of ">}". "}" means jump to next blank line (or end of
paragraph for a prose paradigm). So ">}" means shift right from here to the
next blank line.

When your fingers know the cursor motion commands, folding any of them
into a compound command like "c" or ">" or "<" (guess what that one is)
requires almost no though. It's almost like speaking - you don't think
about grammar in your native language.

| It seems to me, that by the time I would have searched for the right 
| command to use, decided which of the (multiple) matching commands is the 
| right one, then used the command, it would have been quicker and less 
| distracting to have just done the editing by hand. But now I'm just 
| repeating myself.

To repeat yourself in "vi" you just type ".". See? So much faster than
your paragraph above:-)

Cheers,
-- 
Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au>

As your attorney, it is my duty to inform you that it is not important that
you understand what I'm doing or why you're paying me so much money. What's
important is that you continue to do so.
        - Hunter S. Thompson's Samoan Attorney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35889

On 01/01/13 04:12, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> I must admit I find Apple's "help" search box neat this way - you
> can type a keyword is it will actually find the menu item for
> you. Not that I use this for vi, of course...

If you've not used it, Vim's ":helpgrep" command provides full Vim 
regexp power for searching Vim's help.

> No, ">" is indent: it means shift-right. For Python you'd set
> the shiftwidth to 4

For PEP8, you'd also want to set 'expandtab'.  Just to bring my 
semi-OT reply back around to Python :-)

-tkc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35907

On 12/31/2012 10:46 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 14:00:23  -0500, Mitya Sirenef wrote:
 >
 >> I think the general idea is that with editors like Vim you don't get
 >> distracted by having to do some kind of an editor task, letting you keep
 >> your full attention on the code logic. For instance, if I need to change
 >> a block inside parens, I type ci) (stands for change inside parens),
 >> while with a regular editor I'd have to do it manually and by the time
 >> I'm done, I'd forget the bigger picture of what I'm doing with the code.
 >
 > See, by the time I remembered what obscure (to me) command to type, or
 > searched the help files and the Internet, I'd have forgotten what the
 > hell it was I was trying to do. Well, almost. My memory is not quite that
 > bad, but it would certainly be a much bigger disruption to my coding than
 > just doing the edit by hand.


I would agree with you if I had to look up a command every time I use
it. The way it really works for me is that either I use a command often
enough that I remember it from the first time I looked it up, and the
memory is reinforced every time I use it, OR it's such a rare command
that looking it up is not a problem (obviously if it's faster to do it
by hand than to look it up, I can do that, as well, which in Vim means
using lower level commands that still don't require you leaving the home
row.)

>
 > I do love the power of command line tools, but I think that for rich
 > applications like editors, the interface is so clunky that I'd rather use
 > a less-powerful editor, and do more editing manually, than try to
 > memorize "hundreds" of commands.


Clunky is the last word I'd use to describe it (ok maybe for Emacs :-)
I probably remember about 200 commands, plus or minus, but a lot of them
fit into a consistent scheme which makes them much easier to remember:
there's (change delete yank vis-select)*(inner outer)*(letter word WORD 
paragraph )]} )

(Where word includes 'keyword' characters and WORD is separated by spaces).

So, these correspond to commands (cdyv)(ia)(lwWp)]}).

Therefore, deleting 3 WORDs is 3daW (mnemonic: del a WORD 3 times).

I think I have a pretty bad memory but I remembered all of these
commands a few at a time without too much trouble. And they're extremely
useful even now as I'm editing this email.


>
 > With a GUI app, I can run the mouse over the menus and see a high-level
 > overview of everything the app can do in a matter of a second or two.
 > (Perhaps three or five seconds if the app over-uses hierarchical menus.)
 > But with a text interface, commands are much less discoverable. I can
 > also use *spacial* memory to zero in on commands much more easily than
 > verbal memory -- I have no idea whether the command I want is called
 > "Spam" or "Ham" or "Tinned Bully Beef", but I know it's in the top
 > quarter of the "Lunch" menu, and I will recognise it when I see it.


It's not a binary choice, GVim has a customizable menu system with a
simple text format for adding menus (from Vim manual):

     To create a new menu item, use the ":menu" commands.  They are 
mostly like
     the ":map" set of commands but the first argument is a menu item 
name, given
     as a path of menus and submenus with a '.' between them. eg:

        :menu File.Save  :w<CR>
        :inoremenu File.Save  <C-O>:w<CR>
        :menu Edit.Big\ Changes.Delete\ All\ Spaces  :%s/[ ^I]//g<CR>

>
 > On the other hand, it's a lot harder to use a GUI app over a slow SSH
 > connection to a remote machine in a foreign country over a flaky link
 > than it is to use a command line or text-interface app.


With GVim, you can use gui menus just as easily when you open a file
remotely.

>
 >
 >> Another example: >ap stands for "indent a paragraph (separated by blank
 >> lines)". And there are many dozens if not hundreds such commands that
 >> let you stay focused on the logic of your code.
 >
 > Ah yes, the famous "a for indent" mnemonic. *wink*


Well, 'a' is mnemonic for 'a', fittingly ;-). > is for indent, just as <
is for dedent. 'a' is to distinguish from inner paragraph command,
which omits blank lines after the paragraph (which matter for other
commands, but not for indent/dedent.): >ip .


  - mitya


--
Lark's Tongue Guide to Python: http://lightbird.net/larks/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35910

In article <mailman.1528.1357065822.29569.python-list@python.org>,
 Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> wrote:

> Clunky is the last word I'd use to describe it (ok maybe for Emacs :-)
> I probably remember about 200 commands, plus or minus, but a lot of them
> fit into a consistent scheme which makes them much easier to remember

At some point, it becomes muscle memory, which means you don't even 
consciously know what you're typing.  Your brain just says, "delete the 
next three words" and your fingers move in some way which causes that to 
happen.  This is certainly true with emacs, and I imagine it's just as 
true with people who use inferior editors :-)

I used to do a bunch of pair programming with another emacs power user.  
Every once in a while, one of us would say something like, "What did you 
just do?", when the other performed some emacs technique one of us was 
not familiar with.  Invariably, the answer would be, "I don't know", and 
you would have to back up and recreate the key sequence.  Or, just run 
C-? l, which tells you the last 100 characters you typed.

Case in point.  I use C-? l moderately often, when I make some typo and 
I'm not sure what I did wrong.  But, despite the fact that my fingers 
now how to perform "show me the last stuff I typed", I had to go hunting 
to find the actual keystrokes which does that when typing the above 
paragraph :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35913

On 01/01/2013 02:02 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article  <mailman.1528.1357065822.29569.python-list@python.org>,
 > Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> wrote:
 >
 >> Clunky is the last word I'd use to describe it (ok maybe for Emacs :-)
 >> I probably remember about 200 commands, plus or minus, but a lot of them
 >> fit into a consistent scheme which makes them much easier to remember
 >
 > At some point, it becomes muscle memory, which means you don't even
 > consciously know what you're typing. Your brain just says, "delete the
 > next three words" and your fingers move in some way which causes that to
 > happen. This is certainly true with emacs, and I imagine it's just as
 > true with people who use inferior editors :-)
 >
 > I used to do a bunch of pair programming with another emacs power user.
 > Every once in a while, one of us would say something like, "What did you
 > just do?", when the other performed some emacs technique one of us was
 > not familiar with. Invariably, the answer would be, "I don't know", and
 > you would have to back up and recreate the key sequence. Or, just run
 > C-? l, which tells you the last 100 characters you typed.
 >
 > Case in point. I use C-? l moderately often, when I make some typo and
 > I'm not sure what I did wrong. But, despite the fact that my fingers
 > now how to perform "show me the last stuff I typed", I had to go hunting
 > to find the actual keystrokes which does that when typing the above
 > paragraph :-)


That's true with Vim, as well, especially when I'm making a custom
mapping and I can NEVER remember what some combination does, even though
if I actually needed to use it, it pops right out, so to find out, I
have to try it and then I say, "of course, dammit, I use this command 50
times every single day!"; so it's a curious case of one-directional
memory.


<subliminal 1-nanosecond BLINK TAG comment="hope this works, fingers
crossed" content="let's face it, Vim is BETTER as it has always been!">



-- 
Lark's Tongue Guide to Python: http://lightbird.net/larks/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36030

On Tue, 1 Jan 2013, Mitya Sirenef wrote:

> On 01/01/2013 02:02 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
> That's true with Vim, as well, especially when I'm making a custom
> mapping and I can NEVER remember what some combination does, even though
> if I actually needed to use it, it pops right out, so to find out, I
> have to try it and then I say, "of course, dammit, I use this command 50
> times every single day!"; so it's a curious case of one-directional
> memory.

I've found writing macros helps me a lot in this regard. I do qa<stuff>q"aP
fairly frequently.

-W

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36032

On 01/02/2013 10:17 PM, Wayne Werner wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013, Mitya Sirenef wrote:
>
>> On 01/01/2013 02:02 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
>> That's true with Vim, as well, especially when I'm making a custom
>> mapping and I can NEVER remember what some combination does, even though
>> if I actually needed to use it, it pops right out, so to find out, I
>> have to try it and then I say, "of course, dammit, I use this command 50
>> times every single day!"; so it's a curious case of one-directional
>> memory.
>
> I've found writing macros helps me a lot in this regard. I do 
> qa<stuff>q"aP
> fairly frequently.
>
> -W
>

But how does that help remember commands?

(I also use recording, but I use qq because it's easier to type
and I have a Q mapping that plays back q register).

  -m

-- 
Lark's Tongue Guide to Python: http://lightbird.net/larks/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36010

On 01/01/2013 11:43 AM, Mitya Sirenef wrote:
> Therefore, deleting 3 WORDs is 3daW (mnemonic: del a WORD 3 times).

Interesting.  I typically use just d3w.  3daW seems to delete 3 lines
for me, the same result as d3<enter>.  Another favorite command is d or
c followed by a number and then the right arrow key, for manipulating
letters instead of words.

In any case, I can be way more productive with just a few commands
(maybe 3 or 4 commands or concepts) in Vim than in almost any GUI
editor.  In my experience, Vim users almost always find this to be true
for them as well.  Vim really hits the sweet spot for productivity and
usability.  The only thing about Vim that I find clunky is how code
folding macros work, and also code completion hacks (which I have never
needed anyway).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36014

On 01/02/2013 04:33 PM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 01/01/2013 11:43 AM, Mitya  Sirenef wrote:
 >> Therefore, deleting 3 WORDs is 3daW (mnemonic: del a WORD 3 times).
 >
 > Interesting. I typically use just d3w. 3daW seems to delete 3 lines
 > for me, the same result as d3<enter>. Another favorite command is d or
 > c followed by a number and then the right arrow key, for manipulating
 > letters instead of words.


d3w is a different command, it means delete 3 words *ahead* from cursor.
e.g.:

func() lst[] lst2[ind] foo bar

Now put the cursor on letter 'c' (4th from beginning) and use the
command 3daW, it should delete the 3 WORDs, leaving just the 'foo bar'.


>
 >
 > In any case, I can be way more productive with just a few commands
 > (maybe 3 or 4 commands or concepts) in Vim than in almost any GUI
 > editor. In my experience, Vim users almost always find this to be true
 > for them as well. Vim really hits the sweet spot for productivity and
 > usability. The only thing about Vim that I find clunky is how code
 > folding macros work, and also code completion hacks (which I have never
 > needed anyway).


Vim does have a lot of flaws, alas. The highest ones on my list is that
python integration (as a scripting language) is wonky; python can't be
run alongside Vim process; double-escaping is terrible (stuff like
\<lt>blah); process of development is slowed down too much by
over-emphasis on backwards compatibility; the way arguments and counts
are implemented between mappings, commands and functions is byzantine
and way overcomplicated..

That said, Vim is still 1k% better than emacs and 3k% better than
anything else :-).

It's really odd that large companies like google, microsoft, ibm,
facebook don't all chip in to give Bram a few million to hire a few
people and knock the Vim out into the stratosphere, given how much these
companies' employees used Vim for many hours, daily, to great benefit
for said companies. Oh well.

  -m


-- 
Lark's Tongue Guide to Python: http://lightbird.net/larks/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36026

On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 01/01/2013 11:43 AM, Mitya Sirenef wrote:
>> Therefore, deleting 3 WORDs is 3daW (mnemonic: del a WORD 3 times).
>
> Interesting.  I typically use just d3w.  3daW seems to delete 3 lines
> for me, the same result as d3<enter>.  Another favorite command is d or
> c followed by a number and then the right arrow key, for manipulating
> letters instead of words.

Right arrow and not l? Surely you jest! ;)

>
> In any case, I can be way more productive with just a few commands
> (maybe 3 or 4 commands or concepts) in Vim than in almost any GUI
> editor.  In my experience, Vim users almost always find this to be true
> for them as well.  Vim really hits the sweet spot for productivity and
> usability.  The only thing about Vim that I find clunky is how code
> folding macros work, and also code completion hacks (which I have never
> needed anyway).

Yep. That's how I feel. I had used ViEmu in Visual Studio for coding in .NET at
work - but I found that the buffers & macros were more powerful. So now I do
most of my programming in Vim, and only head to VS if I need autocomplete or
some of it's auto-generation tools.

(I'm even writing this email in Vim as my external editor from alpine ;)
-W

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36047

"Wayne Werner" <wayne@waynewerner.com> wrote:
 
> Yep. That's how I feel. I had used ViEmu in Visual Studio for coding in .NET at
> work - but I found that the buffers & macros were more powerful. So now I do
> most of my programming in Vim, and only head to VS if I need autocomplete or
> some of it's auto-generation tools.

Learning X different IDEs for different languages and uses can be 
confusing. So if you use Visual-Studio a lot there is Python Tools for VS [1].
A great but kinda slow extension to VS. Sticking to VS is also useful
if one does Swig and need to debug your crashing .pyd modules.

[1] http://pytools.codeplex.com/

--gv

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35847

On Thu, 2012-12-27 at 12:01 -0800, mogul wrote:
> 'Aloha!
> I'm new to python, got 10-20 years perl and C experience, all gained
> on unix alike machines hacking happily in vi, and later on in vim.
> Now it's python, and currently mainly on my kubuntu desktop.
> Do I really need a real IDE, as the windows guys around me say I do,

You don't need one.

You are crazy if you don't WANT one.

Check out geany <http://www.geany.org/>

-- 
Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam@whitemice.org>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35849

On 31/12/12 12:57:59, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-27 at 12:01 -0800, mogul wrote:
>> 'Aloha!
>> I'm new to python, got 10-20 years perl and C experience, all gained
>> on unix alike machines hacking happily in vi, and later on in vim.
>> Now it's python, and currently mainly on my kubuntu desktop.
>> Do I really need a real IDE, as the windows guys around me say I do,
> 
> You don't need one.

+1

> You are crazy if you don't WANT one.

ITYM: you'd be crazy if you'd want one.

> Check out geany <http://www.geany.org/>

Don't bother: Python comes with a free IDE named IDLE.  Try it
for a few minutes, and you'll find that most of the features
that make vim so wonderful, are missing from IDLE.

Just stay with vim.

-- HansM

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#35859

Hans Mulder <hansmu@xs4all.nl> writes:

> Don't bother: Python comes with a free IDE named IDLE.

And any decent Unix-alike (most OSen apart from Windows) comes with its
own IDE: the shell, a good text editor (Vim or Emacs being the primary
candidates), and a terminal multiplexor (such as ‘tmux’ or GNU Screen).

Learning to use that development environment will benefit you far more
than any language-specific tool.

-- 
 \       “I bought some powdered water, but I don't know what to add.” |
  `\                                                    —Steven Wright |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web