On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 04:53:32PM -0700, Sean Kelly wrote: > On May 19, 2012, at 1:35 PM, "Mehrdad" <wfunct...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > On Saturday, 19 May 2012 at 20:00:03 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > > >> Yikes! I highly recommend using plain vanilla vim, no GUI > > > > Oh geez, that'll take a while lol. At least with GVim, I can > > discover the command names through the menus haha. > > The only way to really learn vim is to suffer through it until it > clicks. The experience is so fundamentally different than other > editors, that menus would just prevent that from happening.
Exactly. Until you've grappled with GUI-less vim, you haven't _really_ used vim. I did say that it was a very frustrating experience for me. But when it clicked, it _really_ clicked. Now I couldn't bear to use pico or joe or any of that stuff. They've become so foreign to me. It's one of those things that have a totally steep learning curve, but totally worth it once you get it. Just like console Linux/bash. (Even I myself find it hard to believe, but there was a time when I used to _hate_ Linux. Yeah.) Or ratpoison (aka how to use a GUI without a mouse). :-P > That said, some editors, like Sublime Text 2 (my current favorite) > have a vi mode that functions pretty closely to how vi does. It's > another way to ease your way into the vi mindset, as it were. > Personally, I know enough vi to get around but not enough to prefer > it. It's simy a matter of necessity though, as vi is the only editor > I've found installed on every system I need to edit on. Too bad it > couldn't at least be vim though. Ugh. Plain vi (non-vim) is a bear to use. Many non-vim vi's have an undo buffer with a depth of 1. And it just goes downhill from there. :-P But at least, once you've eased into the vim mindset, you can navigate around inferior vi's without stumbling into electric fences and stubbing your toes. T -- You are only young once, but you can stay immature indefinitely. -- azephrahel