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

Groups > comp.misc > #5515 > unrolled thread

Eleven years of using vim

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Eleven years of using vim RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-11-02 20:24 +0000
    Re: Eleven years of using vim Dario Niedermann <dnied@tiscali.it> - 2014-11-03 13:37 +0100
      Re: Eleven years of using vim Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-11-03 14:47 +0200
    Re: Eleven years of using vim Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-11-03 12:46 +0000
      Re: Eleven years of using vim gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-11-03 13:14 +0000
      Re: Eleven years of using vim Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-11-03 13:20 +0000
      Re: Eleven years of using vim Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2014-11-04 23:51 +0000
        Re: Eleven years of using vim Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2014-11-05 20:34 -0500
          Re: Eleven years of using vim gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2014-11-06 02:51 +0100
            Re: Eleven years of using vim Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2014-11-06 04:24 -0500
              Re: Eleven years of using vim gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2014-11-09 17:19 +0100
                Re: Eleven years of using vim DMcCunney <dennis.mccunney@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 13:47 -0500
                  Re: Eleven years of using vim gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2014-11-10 14:26 +0100
          Re: Eleven years of using vim Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-11-05 23:58 -0500
            Re: Eleven years of using vim Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-11-06 07:27 +0000
              Re: Eleven years of using vim Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-11-06 09:43 +0200
                Re: Eleven years of using vim Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-11-06 08:50 +0000
          Re: Eleven years of using vim Andy Burns <usenet.feb2014@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2014-11-06 06:40 +0000
      Re: Eleven years of using vim Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2014-11-05 20:32 -0500
    Re: Eleven years of using vim Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2014-11-05 10:31 +0200
      Re: Eleven years of using vim Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-11-05 11:07 +0200
      Re: Eleven years of using vim Forsythe <none@example.com> - 2014-11-08 20:42 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#5515 — Eleven years of using vim

Nice article by a guy who loves vim.

http://statico.github.io/vim.html

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#5521

RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:

> Nice article by a guy who loves vim.
>
> http://statico.github.io/vim.html

I quit using Vim when I realized I had to set the values of about 10
variables[1] to *completely* turn off *any* form of auto-indenting.

That's way too fucked up for my taste.

Switched to Nvi and never looked back.


[1] autoindent, cindent, copyindent, filetype-indent-off, formatoptions,
indentexpr, indentkeys, paste, preserveindent, smartindent.

-- 
Dario Niedermann.              Also on the Internet at:

gopher://retro-net.org/1/dnied/ , http://devio.us/~ndr/

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

#5523

Dario Niedermann <dnied@tiscali.it>:

> I quit using Vim when I realized I had to set the values of about 10
> variables[1] to *completely* turn off *any* form of auto-indenting.

In emacs, you say

   M-x fun

> That's way too fucked up for my taste.
>
> Switched to Nvi and never looked back.

Personally, I'm happy everybody can find their favorite tools. I hate it
when you are tied to some set of tools. You shouldn't standardize on
tools, you should standardize on formats.


Marko

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

#5522

In article <m363ti$c4b$2@solani.org>, RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
>Nice article by a guy who loves vim.
>
>http://statico.github.io/vim.html

It's an interesting article, but I do wonder... I've seen a few like this,
start up editor X, load up plugins Y, Z, etc. bemoan a missing feature
or two, but generally get on with it.

I've been using vim & vi for some 25+ years now... And maybe I'm just
lazy maybe I just put up with it because I started with ye olde vi, but
I've never found the need for all those plugins. I am a bit dyslexic and
like my black text on a pale yellow background though, so never really
got into syntax highlighting. () matching is handy sometimes though,
and the lack of an integrated compile/debug thingy - never needed it -
always been happy with Ctrl-z then Makefiles... I hate auto-indent too.
Split views - good, but so is firing up another xterm to edit another 
file.

I've written editors, ported emacs and done who knows what over those
years, but all in vi or some clone or iMprovement.

Maybe I just spend more time writing code (mostly in C) and text (LaTeX)
than worrying about anything else though?

I can't think what I'm really missing though, or maybe I am just getting
old and stuck in my grumpy old ways!

-Gordon
Ps. vi only has one mode - command mode. It just happens that to terminate
the various insert/change commands you need to press the ESC key ;-)

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

#5524

In article <m37tfm$6b1$1@dont-email.me>,
Gordon Henderson  <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> wrote:
...
>Ps. vi only has one mode - command mode. It just happens that to terminate
>the various insert/change commands you need to press the ESC key ;-)

Agreed.  Whenever you hear someone moan about how the default mode of VI
isn't "type your text" mode - and acts like that's the only possible
editing model in the world - you know you are dealing with someone who
might as well be from another planet (Or be a Republican...).

-- 
This is the GOP's problem.  When you're at the beginning of the year
and you've got nine Democrats running for the nomination, maybe one or
two of them are Dennis Kucinich.  When you have nine Republicans, seven
or eight of them are Michelle Bachmann.

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

#5525

Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> writes:
<snip>
> Ps. vi only has one mode - command mode. It just happens that to terminate
> the various insert/change commands you need to press the ESC key ;-)

And Emacs has only one mode - command mode.  It just happens that many
keys are bound to the self-insert command.  I wonder what all the fuss
is about! ;-)

-- 
Ben.

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

#5543

In comp.editors, Gordon Henderson  <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> wrote:
> In article <m363ti$c4b$2@solani.org>, RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
>> http://statico.github.io/vim.html

FWIW, this article titled "After 11 years" is dated almost eighteen
months ago, so it's likely 12 or 13 years now.

> I've been using vim & vi for some 25+ years now... And maybe I'm just
> lazy maybe I just put up with it because I started with ye olde vi, but
> I've never found the need for all those plugins. I am a bit dyslexic and
> like my black text on a pale yellow background though, so never really
> got into syntax highlighting. () matching is handy sometimes though,
> and the lack of an integrated compile/debug thingy - never needed it -
> always been happy with Ctrl-z then Makefiles... I hate auto-indent too.
> Split views - good, but so is firing up another xterm to edit another 
> file.

I've been using vim longer than that guy, but I still use true vi from
time to time. For me, some of the important things I get from vim are:

	vim fixes the "all marks are forgotten bug" that used to
	plague vi, and I still find once in a very rare while

	the "" register gets remembered between files

	I find split-window very much more useful than multiple xterms,
	because I can use my named registers to yank and put text
	between them.

I generally disable all of the plugins and syntax highlighting. I don't
want colors in my editors. I have three simple "map" commands (simple
enough that I can type by hand when my .exrc isn't present) that
constitute the bulk of my configure-to-taste settings:

	" make S split line on previous space character
	map S F r<cr>
	" make = double a character (eg if(a=0) to if(a==0)
	map = y p
	" make * run the current line as a vi command
	map * "yyy@y

I use * and "u"ndo to iteratively construct very complicated commands,
or to demo shell commands in mail / news, eg earlier today:

	:r! grep ^Trash: my_mail.log | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr

> Ps. vi only has one mode - command mode. It just happens that to terminate
> the various insert/change commands you need to press the ESC key ;-)

Vi has several modes. There's ex, there's "vi"sual, and there's "open".
The "open" one doesn't exist in most clones (including vim). It was
useful for, eg, editing in a "vi"sual style on hardcopy terminals.
There's a one line window and it scrolls to clear the line.

Elijah
------
see no reason to consider the read-only versions as separate modes

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

#5555

On Tue, 4 Nov 2014 23:51:34 +0000 (UTC), Eli the Bearded wrote:
> In comp.editors, Gordon Henderson  <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> wrote:
> > In article <m363ti$c4b$2@solani.org>, RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> >> http://statico.github.io/vim.html
> 
> FWIW, this article titled "After 11 years" is dated almost eighteen
> months ago, so it's likely 12 or 13 years now.
> 
> > [quoted text muted]
> > and the lack of an integrated compile/debug thingy - never needed it -
> > always been happy with Ctrl-z then Makefiles... I hate auto-indent too.
> > Split views - good, but so is firing up another xterm to edit another 
> > file.
> 
> I've been using vim longer than that guy,
> 

Good lord -- for me I think it's a quarter of a century. I started 
using it in the late 1980s because I could use the same editor and 
same preference file in VAX/VMS, Windows, and *NIX.

-- 
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
                                   http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...

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

#5556

El 06/11/14 a las 02:34, Stan Brown escribió:
> Good lord -- for me I think it's a quarter of a century. I started
> using it in the late 1980s because I could use the same editor and
> same preference file in VAX/VMS, Windows, and *NIX.

And don't you like the EDT?

-- 
http://www.telecable.es/personales/gamo/

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

#5564

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 02:51:24 +0100, gamo wrote:
> 
> El 06/11/14 a las 02:34, Stan Brown escribió:
> > Good lord -- for me I think it's a quarter of a century. I started
> > using it in the late 1980s because I could use the same editor and
> > same preference file in VAX/VMS, Windows, and *NIX.
> 
> And don't you like the EDT?

No me gustó.

-- 
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
                                   http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...

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

#5587

El 06/11/14 a las 10:24, Stan Brown escribió:
> On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 02:51:24 +0100, gamo wrote:
>>
>> El 06/11/14 a las 02:34, Stan Brown escribió:
>>> Good lord -- for me I think it's a quarter of a century. I started
>>> using it in the late 1980s because I could use the same editor and
>>> same preference file in VAX/VMS, Windows, and *NIX.
>>
>> And don't you like the EDT?
>
> No me gustó.
>

That's was my first impression, but trusty people
told that was a good editor and I give it a second
chance. I had used good DOS editors as 'qedit'

But up to now I didn't find nothing more precise
that using numkeypad as a function launcher.
So, for a time now, I'm with JED in EDT mode.
By obscure forces of X, that actually doesn't
work in gnome-terminal but menus are OK.

Cheers

-- 
http://www.telecable.es/personales/gamo/

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

#5590

On 11/9/2014 11:19 AM, gamo wrote:
> El 06/11/14 a las 10:24, Stan Brown escribió:
>> On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 02:51:24 +0100, gamo wrote:
>>>
>>> El 06/11/14 a las 02:34, Stan Brown escribió:
>>>> Good lord -- for me I think it's a quarter of a century. I started
>>>> using it in the late 1980s because I could use the same editor and
>>>> same preference file in VAX/VMS, Windows, and *NIX.
>>>
>>> And don't you like the EDT?
>>
>> No me gustó.
>
> That's was my first impression, but trusty people
> told that was a good editor and I give it a second
> chance. I had used good DOS editors as 'qedit'

I used EDT back when on DEC minis.  It was certainly an improvement over 
SOS, and video TECO didn't run in the environment I was in.

> But up to now I didn't find nothing more precise
> that using numkeypad as a function launcher.
> So, for a time now, I'm with JED in EDT mode.
> By obscure forces of X, that actually doesn't
> work in gnome-terminal but menus are OK.

The problem with EDT was that it was intrinsically bound with the VT100 
terminal keyboard. Attempts to emulate EDT on other platforms have to 
map EDT to their keyboards as best they can.  You run something like 
that because you used EDT back when and want to retain the familiar 
environment.  It's the same sort of thing that has people using WordStar 
or an editor than can be configured to use WS key assignments.  (I 
learned WordStar back in the day when WS was the second editor you 
learned, because the one you preferred might not be on the PC you had to 
use but WS probably was.  I later had Gnu Emacs set to use WS command 
assignments to avoid retraining my fingers.)
______
Dennis

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

#5600

El 09/11/14 a las 19:47, DMcCunney escribió:
> On 11/9/2014 11:19 AM, gamo wrote:
>> El 06/11/14 a las 10:24, Stan Brown escribió:
>>> On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 02:51:24 +0100, gamo wrote:
>>>>
>>>> El 06/11/14 a las 02:34, Stan Brown escribió:
>>>>> Good lord -- for me I think it's a quarter of a century. I started
>>>>> using it in the late 1980s because I could use the same editor and
>>>>> same preference file in VAX/VMS, Windows, and *NIX.
>>>>
>>>> And don't you like the EDT?
>>>
>>> No me gustó.
>>
>> That's was my first impression, but trusty people
>> told that was a good editor and I give it a second
>> chance. I had used good DOS editors as 'qedit'
>
> I used EDT back when on DEC minis.  It was certainly an improvement over
> SOS, and video TECO didn't run in the environment I was in.
>
>> But up to now I didn't find nothing more precise
>> that using numkeypad as a function launcher.
>> So, for a time now, I'm with JED in EDT mode.
>> By obscure forces of X, that actually doesn't
>> work in gnome-terminal but menus are OK.
>
> The problem with EDT was that it was intrinsically bound with the VT100
> terminal keyboard. Attempts to emulate EDT on other platforms have to
> map EDT to their keyboards as best they can.  You run something like
> that because you used EDT back when and want to retain the familiar
> environment.  It's the same sort of thing that has people using WordStar
> or an editor than can be configured to use WS key assignments.  (I
> learned WordStar back in the day when WS was the second editor you
> learned, because the one you preferred might not be on the PC you had to
> use but WS probably was.  I later had Gnu Emacs set to use WS command
> assignments to avoid retraining my fingers.)
> ______
> Dennis

Yes, the joe editor still retains as an option the WordStar key
layout.

Cheers

-- 
http://www.telecable.es/personales/gamo/

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

#5559

On Wed, 5 Nov 2014, Stan Brown wrote:

> On Tue, 4 Nov 2014 23:51:34 +0000 (UTC), Eli the Bearded wrote:
>> In comp.editors, Gordon Henderson  <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> wrote:
>>> In article <m363ti$c4b$2@solani.org>, RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
>>>> http://statico.github.io/vim.html
>>
>> FWIW, this article titled "After 11 years" is dated almost eighteen
>> months ago, so it's likely 12 or 13 years now.
>>
>>> [quoted text muted]
>>> and the lack of an integrated compile/debug thingy - never needed it -
>>> always been happy with Ctrl-z then Makefiles... I hate auto-indent too.
>>> Split views - good, but so is firing up another xterm to edit another
>>> file.
>>
>> I've been using vim longer than that guy,
>>
>
> Good lord -- for me I think it's a quarter of a century. I started
> using it in the late 1980s because I could use the same editor and
> same preference file in VAX/VMS, Windows, and *NIX.
>
I've used the editor that came with Pine, pico,  since 1996.

I had a program for my Radio Shack COlor Computer running Microware OS-9 
that was a variant of Vi, that was bout 1987 or 88.  I ddnt' like it, but 
I had it.  A couple of years later, I was runing a flakey Atari ST, and 
found Mark WIlliams C for it at a clearance, and I'm not sure what editor 
came with that.  Maybe there were two, because I know I could use a 
version of Emacs on it, and I remember getting a book about emacs, but 
don't remember actually using emacs.

   Michael

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

#5561

In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1411052355500.18387@darkstar.example.org>,
Michael Black  <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:

>I had a program for my Radio Shack COlor Computer running Microware OS-9 
>that was a variant of Vi, that was bout 1987 or 88.  I ddnt' like it, but 
>I had it.  A couple of years later, I was runing a flakey Atari ST, and 
>found Mark WIlliams C for it at a clearance, and I'm not sure what editor 
>came with that.  Maybe there were two, because I know I could use a 
>version of Emacs on it, and I remember getting a book about emacs, but 
>don't remember actually using emacs.

There was an editor called STeVIe - Which stood for ST Editor for
VI enthusiasts[1] or something like that. I ported it to a platform I
was working on ~26 years back, then used it to port emacs to the same
platform - and stuck with VI ever since...

Before that my Unix was a v6 and v7 where I used ed and something called
em - editor for mortals which was a bit ed-like, but had a command (%
iirc) that would display 10 lines above and 10 below the one you were
editing - early form of editing on glass tty's...

As well as a plethora of other editors on various other platforms I was
working with - Apple II, CP/M, Prime, BBC, early PC XT, ucsd, emas, etc,
etc, etc,

Gordon
[1] http://nosuch.com/tjt/stevie/

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

#5562

Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net>:

> Before that my Unix was a v6 and v7 where I used ed and something
> called em - editor for mortals which was a bit ed-like, but had a
> command (% iirc) that would display 10 lines above and 10 below the
> one you were editing - early form of editing on glass tty's...

My father told me how he edited programs a bit earlier. The program was
a physical deck of cards. If he needed to modify some lines, he would
carefully print (with a pen) the modified lines on a special sheet.
Then, he would send the sheet to the keypunch typist, who would produce
the modified cards and hand them over to the operator. The operator
would take the designated cards out of the deck and put in the new
cards.

The operator would then schedule a compilation, and my father could
expect a compilation listing in about 45 minutes. Just enough time for a
coffee break.


Marko

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

#5563

In article <87vbmswz7s.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>,
Marko Rauhamaa  <marko@pacujo.net> wrote:
>Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net>:
>
>> Before that my Unix was a v6 and v7 where I used ed and something
>> called em - editor for mortals which was a bit ed-like, but had a
>> command (% iirc) that would display 10 lines above and 10 below the
>> one you were editing - early form of editing on glass tty's...
>
>My father told me how he edited programs a bit earlier. The program was
>a physical deck of cards. If he needed to modify some lines, he would
>carefully print (with a pen) the modified lines on a special sheet.
>Then, he would send the sheet to the keypunch typist, who would produce
>the modified cards and hand them over to the operator. The operator
>would take the designated cards out of the deck and put in the new
>cards.
>
>The operator would then schedule a compilation, and my father could
>expect a compilation listing in about 45 minutes. Just enough time for a
>coffee break.

Fairly typical of centralised / batch processing systems in the 60's
and probably through to the 80's in more traditional environments
(commerce). When I went to Uny in 1979 they still insisted on us writing
out programs on coding sheets to be typed in by the data entry operators
which would then schedulle the compile and run - we'd hopefully pick up
the output and listing the next day - they just couldn't get their had
round our class - probably one of the first who'd already had 1-2 years
experience on e.g. Apple II's, PETs in an interactive environment. We were
allowed to edit our programs once the coding sheets had been entered in -
using TTY33's, but their grossly overloaded Prime and batch processing systems
were no match for an Apple II at the time...

Most fun editor (FSVO Fun) was a proper tape stream editor I used on an
Eliot 903. Punch edit tape (on a TTY33), load editor, load edit tape,
load source tape and it would punch a new program source tape. Marginally
easier than editing the tape on the TTY33... (And a good intro to the
unix sed program!)

Gordon

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

#5560

Stan Brown wrote:

> Good lord -- for me I think it's a quarter of a century. I started
> using it in the late 1980s because I could use the same editor and
> same preference file in VAX/VMS, Windows, and *NIX.

I've tolerated vi(m) on unix-like OSes since the mid 80's learning 
enough to make me productive, but never wanted to use it anywhere it 
wasn't already installed, I used to like EDIT/TPU on VMS.

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

#5554

On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 12:46:46 +0000 (UTC), Gordon Henderson wrote:
> 
> I've been using vim & vi for some 25+ years now... And maybe I'm just
> lazy maybe I just put up with it because I started with ye olde vi, but
> I've never found the need for all those plugins.
> 

+1

-- 
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
                                   http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...

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

#5545

RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:

> Nice article by a guy who loves vim.
>
> http://statico.github.io/vim.html

I sometimes find myself editing my Emacs config file with vi. I guess I
developed a vi habit in the bad old days when computers at the
university were overloaded and starting Emacs took minutes...

BTW, since he mentions rxvt-unicode as a candidate for a 256-color
terminal, does it actually have that now? Last time I tried it had maybe
80-something colors so I switched to Konsole, to be able to use the same
color setups in Windows (MinTTY) and Linux. Is it just that rxvt-unicode
in Debian 7 is old or is he just wrong?

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web