Path: csiph.com!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.alt.net!not-for-mail From: owl Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux Subject: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 23:30:57 +0000 (UTC) Organization: O.W.L. Lines: 23 Message-ID: References: <87o92vkihl.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> <0a8ptf-ogu.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <7mgptf-cg4.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <10eqtf-scp.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.rooftop.invalid X-Face: $BHf)vM$6p_?9L`jmOQ54JeNyL+%MZGGRfH8&grb[Y%-jU`MCPAQN=/SVDa{(/67bP(YB}rjV^h>cUh Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:27301 alt.os.linux:57015 In comp.os.linux.misc Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 19/06/2019 22.10, owl wrote: >> In comp.os.linux.misc Carlos E.R. wrote: >>> On 19/06/2019 14.30, owl wrote: >>>> But the real >>>> power of vim navigation comes from the fact that these commands can be >>>> given a count. For example, 20j or 20k to go down or up by twenty lines. >>> >>> Yes, I have seen that on some ancient editors. I can live without it :-) >>> >> >> And the alternative is less efficient. > > Sure, when you already know that it is 20 chars or 20 words in one > direction. I never know, I would have to count them. If I see the point, > I click the mouse at it. > Sometimes mouse-click placement is inaccurate. Very often for me, in fact, unless I do it slowly. And there is the very need to reach for the mouse in the first place. With vim, you can get the cursor exactly where you need it in three or four rapid keystrokes.