emacs or vi

Emacs rooz. Bring it on vi kids~

>>200
JUST USE THE BUILT IN HELP FUNCTION IN ANY REAL EDITOR (Vim) OK

Sure, you might have to read some to actually know how to use the help.

>>201
Again, for *basic functionality* that's far more work than I should have to do in a modern editor.

You people keep missing the point, let me put it in caps so that maybe you'll get it finally. THE COMPUTER WORKS **FOR YOU**, **YOU** SHOULD NOT HAVE TO WORK **FOR THE COMPUTER**!

>>202
Vim works for me with minimal effort, much better than taking it up the ass by the worthlessness of most other editors.

>>203 enjoy your inferior UI!

>>204
What makes it inferior, HUH?

What makes is superior is the clean interface (almost like ed), the intuitive (when you become one with the universe) key assignments, the relative low rate of key spamming (you don't have to combine keys too often, which is good), language support, lots of features (but importantly, not too many), a large plugin repository, normal mode (almost as good as ed), man, ed sure is the best editor ever.

Too bad I like syntax highlighting, otherwise I'd use ed all the time.

What makes it inferior, HUH?

Multi-modal, you dumb shit.

the intuitive (when you become one with the universe) key assignments

You're killing me here...

relative low rate of key spamming (you don't have to combine keys too often, which is good),

Yeah, you just have to change mode all the time. No spamming there...

lots of features (but importantly, not too many)

For vim? You're on crack.

People go on an on about how multi-modal interfaces are a Bad Thing. The thing is, I have this key on my keyboard labelled caps lock. When I press it, I CAN TYPE IN CAPS WITHOUT HAVING TO HOLD SHIFT DOWN. WHEN I PRESS IT AGAIN I can type normally again. So I guess if you thing holding down shift is cruise control for cool, then multiple modes aren't suitable for you.

Notepad 4EVA

>>201
vim's help is butt ugly and it's made of shit and fail
And no, I shouldn't need to read anything to start using it and to do anything simple to medium complexity.

>>205
What makes vim's interface inferior? It's lack thereof. It has almost no interface, so if you don't know the shortcut key or confusing and illogical command, you have to read a manual.

>>207
Flawed argument, because Caps Lock alters just character properties, not functionality.

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((i(((((((((((((((((am))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))emacs)faggot())))))))))((((((((((()))))))))((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))

>>210
emacs also requires you to read shit before doing *basic* functions, and therefore is made of shit and fail.

>>208
For a  simple editor, Notepad is perfectly acceptable, and is preferable than some arcane bullocks from the 1970's when it comes to making simple changes to files (for the rest, you want an IDE or an honest to god word processor).

>>202
When do you ever "work for a computer?" This isn't a 22nd century apocalytic robots-have-taken-over-the-world movie.

Of course the computer always works for you. You learning how to make the computer work for you doesn't entail you working for the computer.

Take your hey-look-I-constructed-a-sentence-in-which-the-two-clauses-are-inversions-of-each-other-it-must-be-true mentality and GTFO.

>Of course the computer always works for you. You learning how to make the computer work for you doesn't entail you working for the computer.

It does when it entails throwing up unneeded complexity; and when it comes to unneeded complexity, VI and Emacs wrote the book (which is the same one I presume you want people to look in).

It is not always possible to present tasks in the simplest manner, however, when it is possible to do so, then a better program will present them in the simplest manner practical. This is the basis of good UI design.

However -being designed in an era before people gave much thought to decent UI or considerations such as end-users or carpal tunnel syndrome- both emacs and VI go far out into left field as how they approach even simple editing tasks.

Because they turn editing into a chore where discovering the poorly thought-out commands are a Rite Of Passage they create *unneeded* work for the end user. Simple tasks should be simple to do; but both editors not only add unneeded complexity, they hail that complexity _as a sign of superiority_!

In conclusion, as editors; they fail hard, and need to gb2/1979 when there really wasn't anything better.

Simple things are simple to do in Vim, same with advanced tasks. As long as you know how. Figuring something out is a once-in-a-lifetime thing that will improve your productivity by up to 76% according to my study I just conducted with my erect penis.

Dumbing things down is not an option as it requires serious users to bend over and take it anally from the editor while they try to perform anything more complex than typing characters into a text file.

No, a scripting language for advanced tasks is not the solution (unless it's some task like building files and such). If you can do it in the editor, then do so.

>Dumbing things down is not an option as it requires serious users to bend over and take it anally from the editor while they try to perform anything more complex than typing characters into a text file.

Your premise that everything is either *all stupid* or *all complex* fails. In modern editors you can save in one keystroke (^S), likewise for exiting (M-F4); with editors such as Ultraedit, KWrite you can also do more advanced tasks while still retaining that same simplicity.

Let's do a quick comparision:

Saving in vi:
<esc>:w (three characters)
Saving in emacs
Ctrl-X, Ctrl-W (four characters)
Saving in abiword, notepad, kedit, kwrite, etc
Ctrl-s (two characters)

Quitting in vi
<esc>:q (3 characters)
Quitting in emacs
Ctrl-X Ctrl-C (4 characters)
Quitting in most other, modern GUI editors
M-F4

While building on (as opposed to throwing away) that simplicity, modern word processing programs and IDEs also offer more complex functions, and any decent program will allow you to define you own keybindings or create macros for often-used tasks.

Note: it's one more keystroke for vim since you have to press Enter after entering the command.

>>216

OH SHI-
That's the second thing I got wrong (I believe the traditional way to save in emacs is Ctrl-X, Ctrl-S, though I don't use it enough to be sure).

Of course, the fact that both vi and emacs require four keys to save detracts nothing from my point.

>>191
Logical tree structure. Never heard of HCI, or *gasp* how to design a usable webpage?

>>215
M-F4 works in GVim, and ^s is unmapped in all modes (^s is off-limits when talking to a terminal).

YAY! While looking for a shortcut for saving, I found ZQ, quit without saving! I had been looking for it and it was right below ZZ (write and quit) ... >_< I should add a mapping for ZA to :qa!.


Say I want to sort a list that is part of a file, in Vim, I'd just select the list with v (just found out there's V, for linewise selection, I'll be using it every day now :)), some movement commands (there is probably one to select until the next empty line, ah, }), and then %!sort to sort the list.

In any other editor... If I'm lucky I'll find a menu option, or even a pipe function (never seen one AFAIK), otherwise I will have to use an external tool... I think MS Word can sort selections :)

Oh well, that's just to show that everything is so easy in Vim even though it took me 300 hours in MS Paint at 4 AM to write this reply.

>>219
YAY! I've found an illogical three key command for a simple task had to do with another illogical command of four keys before! I should alias ZJKASF to cut a line!

Don't you see this is all wankery? You make me think Gentoo ricers are sane.

As for sorting, UltraEdit, for example, has builtin sorting (bindable to any simple key combination you want), as well as pipes. PSPad probably does too. I don't know what } does in vim but if by any chance it selects blocks, most decent editors I've seen (including UE and PSPad)) does that.

>>220
Gentoo rules, foo'!

>>220 as you can see from >>221, all emacs/vi freaks are either Gentoo Ricers, BSD burnouts or LFS nuts.

>>222 has never experienced the embrace of a fine maiden.

>>222 knew better than to rtfm and to waste his time on editors that need esc-:fgsfds or m-X^E^G-M-^del in order to make them go VROOM VROOM, and therefore was able to lose his virginity af the age when most ricers were learning what CFLAGS are.

>>224
hahaha I'm gonna have to bind esc-:fgsfds to something really obscure.

>>215
On the other hand, what about creating a structure like this, which I use a lot when I program:

void blah () {
    |  <---- have caret here to start entering code
}

In vim (assuming you've typed out the signature already)

{ <Enter> } <Esc> O <Tab>

In most other editors:

{ <Enter> } <Left> <Enter> <Up> <Tab>

Yes, it saves only one key, but remember that the second case also requires that you move your hand away from the home row over to the arrow keys, which is extra inconvenience. Now I had thought that the "insert-line" feature in UltraEdit (Ctrl-Enter) did this, but unfortunately it behaves like <End> <Enter> rather than <Home> <Enter>.

>>220
How do I pipe commands in UltraEdit? I can't find it in the menus, and searching for the word pipe in help doesn't bring up anything useful.

>>222
No, I'm not a "Ricer". And I agree with you that it's retarded to obssess over really obscure editor features. But I still find Vim easier to use than any gui-heavy editor I know of.

>>224
For VROOM-VROOM:
set ttyfast
ウロオオオオオオ〜〜〜〜ッ

>>226
Fail. You actually press the same number of keys in your keyboard in vim, unless your keyboard has an uppercase O key. On top of that, the vim combination is fugly to learn, while the other way is just logic and common sense use of a modern editor. Finally, you can create macros or templates for that in modern editors, even have them generate the enclosing brace.

As for pipes in UE, you're right, I haven't found them either. You can run commands on active files but not pipe selections. You can create shortcuts to commands and do some more stuff with Tools configuration in the Advanced menu.

>>226
With some indentation setting on you'll only need the {^M}^[O.

In this situation I'd consider using ^O instead of ^[ as well as it is probably faster than ^[ which is usually not remapped to capslock or ctrl.

Not an user of UltraEdit, but I'd assume Ctrl-Shift-Enter inserts a line above instead of under.

>>228
Okay, I guess if you count modifiers too, you have a point. But still, you have to move over to the arrow keys. Someone mentioned a long time ago that vim and emacs gives you rsi. It's true for emacs, since you have to ctrl- everything, which is awkward, but I don't see how it's true for vim. In fact, from what I understand, the leading cause of certain types of RSI are repeated large motions like moving your hand from the keyboard to the mouse, or to the arrow/home/end/pgup/pgdown keys.

Someone argued many posts ago that you should use a scripting language to do heavy text modification. In that case vim wins, because it's not apparent how you would filter a section of text through a script in something like UltraEdit (unless of course, you cut and paste the text into another document, run the filter, then cut and paste it back, but you don't need any convincing to see how bad that is), whereas in Vim, it's well integrated and very convenient.

>>230
Agree on applying a command to text selections, first thing vim does well. I'll see if PSPad can do it. It probably can since you can script it; in the worst case I'd need to create a script to take the current selection and run it through a pipe to an external command asked to the user. I could script that in any of JavaScript, VBScript, Python, Perl, and probably more.

Vim is better but you Emacs is written in Lisp, I'm confused :s

>>232
k

>>233
L

your turn

(add-character ( add
                (l, 1)
              )
       )
Lisp indentation is a mystery.

>>235
Ugh, that twat ESR uses shitty indentation too. Closing parens should never have a line to themselves. Opening parens can, and should be indented 2 spaces.

>>>234
m

Both are inferior to metapad.

>>236
(
  add-character
    (
      add
        (
          1, 1))))

The poor bastards who fell for it   I believe I   have to state   the obvious I.