Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

emacs or vi

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-08 23:50

Emacs rooz. Bring it on vi kids~

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-04 12:05

>>80
You sure? That whirly looks suspicious...

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-10 19:07

>>55
>Good news is there is a Vim mode for emacs so I can use it without ruining my wrists.

you sir have saved my day

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-11 5:01

>>82
PROTIP: The emacs mode sucks ass.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-11 5:01

>>83
Vim mode.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-13 19:58

>>83
PROTIP: The emacs sucks ass.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-14 4:11

PROTIP: Unix editors suck ass

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-14 4:34

>>1-86
PROTIP: Editor wars are the dumbest pissing contests ever.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-14 9:16

>>87
hahaha oh wow

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-14 15:35

vi key bindings are much more efficient when you measure wrist-miles, or, how much movement your wrist has to take over the course of a day.  i'd love editors like subethaedit or textmate if they supported vi key bindings ... why don't they?  lame.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 1:25

wrist-miles

You want wrist miles? How about vi gets rid of that faggot dual mode first?

Oh, wait, what am I saying? Constantly changing mode saves strokes. Now pass me the coolaid.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 3:35

>>90
This is why emacs and vi both are gay as hell. Real editors take advantage of modern principles of interface design and have real menus that don't require meta-alt-penis-foodprocessor to use.

* > {vi||emacs}

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 3:38

>>91
Ah menus. Because I love taking my hands of the keyboard to aim the mouse pointer at a small area of the screen.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 4:11

>>92 has never heard of hotkeys.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 4:17

>>93
Which are different from emacs key bindings how exactly?

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 4:29

>>94
They suck by default, and the editor is hopelessly retarded and there's no fixing.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 4:35

>>95
That would be a good argument if it were:
a) an argument
b) good

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 4:42

Let's see: alt-meta-c-x-S-kitchen sink

Noooo, there's no difference.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 4:47

In Vim, the hotkeys are easy.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 5:21

But still has that gay dual mode?

Name: Linus Tarballs 2006-03-15 6:13

My name is Linus Tarballs and I pronounce 'emacs' as 'gaaaaaayyyyyyy'.

Oh, and, 100GET!

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 6:16

>>99

Can be disabled. (Although then you lose most of the good things of vim)

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 6:21

>>94
>Ah menus. Because I love taking my hands of the keyboard to aim the mouse pointer at a small area of the screen.

As if playing keyboard-twister with your fingers is really any more effiecent (PROTIP: it's not). As someone else pointed out, if you really have a problem with mice (and in 2006, that really IS a problem, but whatever, Mr CLI) there's always keyboard shortcuts (which are almost *always* more terse and effiecent then their retarded emacs counter parts).

Long story short; people who use emacs or vi are really fucking stupid, just FYI.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 6:25

if you really have a problem with mice (and in 2006, that really IS a problem, but whatever, Mr CLI
I have no problem with my mouse, I just don't want to have to reach for one when I'm trying to type.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 6:30

again, a non-issue; both offer key bindings; but emacs' bindings are made of crude hax and fail.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 6:43

Yes, fine, emacs is a crude hack, it must be true because Anonymous said so. gb2/notepad.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 6:53

emacs is made of lose and fail

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 7:37

>>99
Vim has 11 modes. One of them is the ^o mode which allows you to enter a command and then return to insert mode.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 17:46

>>100
Hahaha man, you made my day

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-15 22:05

>>107

No retard, it has command mode and insert mode. There are some different kind of insert modes but wtf.

OMG I CAN INSERT BEFORE CURRENT CHARACTER.

Thats a not a different mode is it?

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-16 4:35

>>109
No, that is just the insert mode.

1. The normal mode, where you can enter commands with :, move around with hjkl and do whatever.
2. Visual mode, activated with v in normal mode, allows selection of text and then running commands on the selections.
3. Select mode... I don't really know, I guess that's what you get when you select with the mouse.
4. Insert mode, for writing text.
5. Command-line mode, I think this is the ^o mode.
6. Ex mode, like ed.

The 5 other modes are just special cases.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-16 14:05

>>100
Signed!

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-17 6:44

1. open Emacs
2. activate the supposedly Vim-like mode of Emacs, with Alt-X viper-mode
3. try to use v, V, ^V, gq, or really any remotely useful Vim feature
4. go back to Vim

In other news, for those who loath dual-mode:
http://cream.sourceforge.net/

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-17 12:00

>>112

Erm. If you want a single mode editor why use vim? The power is in the dual modes.

but omg it has customisable toolbars. what a chunk of shit.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-17 12:22

>>113
You call that power? As in, the power is in faster wheelchairs? The power is in not needing them bub.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-17 13:12

>>113
GVim for the lose, I have all the toolbars, scrollbars and crap configured away so it looks like its twin brother Vim.

>>114
waht;  normal editors suck because they suck; it's like comparing binary packages to compiling yourself. The compiled package will always be faster, no matter what you do. I really wonder how binary packages are created, I think they somehow excavate them from swamps and stuff.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-17 13:30

>>115
waste your time compiling shit that won't work half the time, gentoo loser.
most of us have actual *things* to do, you know? like learning all the hidden features of our editor :)

my editor is better than yours

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-17 14:19

>>116
I use /bin/ed, there is no better editor.

Also, my packages consistently compile -- BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT I DOING FOR GREAT JUSTICE ok

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-17 15:18

>>115
normal editors suck because they suck; it's like comparing binary packages to compiling yourself
Hahaha Lunix boy

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-17 15:38

>>115
>waht;  normal editors suck because they suck; it's like comparing binary packages to compiling yourself.

In other words, it's geek ricer wank. This confirms that emcas & vi FAIL.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-17 16:55

>>118,119
Enjoy your editors that take minutes to start, and seconds per chracter. FACT.

Yes, I made a typo because my custom compiled Firefox is BLAZING.
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -