[2011-06-12 18:55] Martin Kühl <martin.ku...@gmail.com> > > [...] command-quasimode [...]
> [...] mostly modeless. [2011-06-12 22:38] Connor Lane Smith <c...@lubutu.com> > > For substitution I'm tempted to just add a keybind to switch to and > from the command pane, which appears at the bottom of the view > (`Quake-like', as Paul says). That means we can do this just with a > raw command, like vi does with `:'. > > So that's pretty much modeless, then. What's the difference between a mode and a ``quasimode''? Almost none! It appears as if you just *want* modes. ;-) I have followed this editor discussion, only reading. Still I wonder why you try so much to stay modeless. Modes are a real advantage because each mode offers a separate editor. Take vi: You can edit in normal mode (= the actual vi mode) or in ex mode or in insert mode (e.g. with ^W, ^U). You have the choice which editor (mode) you use for some editing task. Ed has modes, too: Command and insert mode. Surely, the problems are knowing in which mode you're in and switching modes. But in return, each mode lets you re-use your keyboard keys (the optimum) and for each mode you can design a new editor that's best suited for the kind of editing this mode is intended to do. Am I missing some big disadvantages of modes? I simply don't understand your strong dislike. meillo
