Re: button t useless?
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:06:01 -0700 (PDT), Arun Easi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In mapping. bdw cannot be used generically to delete the word under cursor. Single letter objects is one case. Other one is when the cursor is at the start of the word (I know you are talking when cursor is in the middle). When you are doing the operation visually, I do not see much advantage with one over the other. dw deletes to the start of the next word, while diw deletes the word but leaves any space beyond it intact. In most cases I find I want to remove a word completely, including pulling the next word over to the cursor, so dw is better for me. Starting from the middle of a word, it's a choice of bdw or diwdw. -- Matthew Winn
Re: button t useless?
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Matthew Winn wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:06:01 -0700 (PDT), Arun Easi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In mapping. bdw cannot be used generically to delete the word under cursor. Single letter objects is one case. Other one is when the cursor is at the start of the word (I know you are talking when cursor is in the middle). When you are doing the operation visually, I do not see much advantage with one over the other. dw deletes to the start of the next word, while diw deletes the word but leaves any space beyond it intact. In most cases I find I want to remove a word completely, including pulling the next word over to the cursor, so dw is better for me. Starting from the middle of a word, it's a choice of bdw or diwdw. daw would do what you want. Actually there is a whole bunch of deletions under help daw, most of which I never use, maybe because I dont remember it when editing. I mostly delete using dw or dfchar followed by .
Re: button t useless?
Matthew Winn wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:06:01 -0700 (PDT), Arun Easi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In mapping. bdw cannot be used generically to delete the word under cursor. Single letter objects is one case. Other one is when the cursor is at the start of the word (I know you are talking when cursor is in the middle). When you are doing the operation visually, I do not see much advantage with one over the other. dw deletes to the start of the next word, while diw deletes the word but leaves any space beyond it intact. In most cases I find I want to remove a word completely, including pulling the next word over to the cursor, so dw is better for me. Starting from the middle of a word, it's a choice of bdw or diwdw. To delete the current word including the space on one side, use daw (Delete A Word). Best regards, Tony. -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 203. You're an active member of more than 20 newsgroups.
RE: button t useless?
I'm a one-handed typist (right-handed), and to me both are about equally bad on ergonomical grounds. I don't think of what I do as pecking however: I know where the keys are on my AZERTY keyboard, and I use all five fingers of my right hand, which is not riveted to a constant location over the keyboard: this makes for reasonably fast typing, maybe faster that some of you decadactylographers ;-) . I go with the previous argument however: bdw has the inconvenient of including a prepare step: bdw (move);(delete(word)) diw (delete((inner)word)) In my mental model, bdw is two steps, diw is one. Best regards, Tony. Tony, I had indeed not considered those who either typed with one hand or used a non-QWERTY keyboard. In retrospect, if I were typing with one hand, I think I would prefer bdw to diw simply because the keys for it are close together, allowing for faster entry. Bdw is definitely two steps, both mentally and in actuality. As someone else pointed out, you can repeat diw with a ., but not bdw, as it is not atomic. Regards, Salman.
Re: button t useless?
Halim, Salman wrote: I'm a one-handed typist (right-handed), and to me both are about equally bad on ergonomical grounds. I don't think of what I do as pecking however: I know where the keys are on my AZERTY keyboard, and I use all five fingers of my right hand, which is not riveted to a constant location over the keyboard: this makes for reasonably fast typing, maybe faster that some of you decadactylographers ;-) . I go with the previous argument however: bdw has the inconvenient of including a prepare step: bdw (move);(delete(word)) diw (delete((inner)word)) In my mental model, bdw is two steps, diw is one. Best regards, Tony. Tony, I had indeed not considered those who either typed with one hand or used a non-QWERTY keyboard. In retrospect, if I were typing with one hand, I think I would prefer bdw to diw simply because the keys for it are close together, allowing for faster entry. Bdw is definitely two steps, both mentally and in actuality. As someone else pointed out, you can repeat diw with a ., but not bdw, as it is not atomic. Regards, Salman. AZERTY is not very different from QWERTY: it swaps A with Q, Z with W, moves the M to the right of the L, the digits to uppercase, and only the punctuation really moves wildly (and differently in fr_BE [mine] than in fr_FR). (What I wouldn't want is to have to use a Dvorak keyboard or one of those newfangled two-part Microsoft keyboards which practically /require/ both-hands typing.) For bdw I hit b, then I have to go still further away left to get dw. For diw, I hit d with my right index, i with my right little finger, and there isn't that much of a displacement to get at the w (which is where your z is). Of course it may be different for real hunter-pecker monodactylographers. Best regards, Tony. -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 206. You religiously respond immediately to e-mail, while ignoring your growing pile of snail mail.
Re: button t useless?
On 4/26/07, A.J.Mechelynck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I go with the previous argument however: bdw has the inconvenient of including a prepare step: bdw (move);(delete(word)) diw (delete((inner)word)) In my mental model, bdw is two steps, diw is one. Not to mention that the repeat-command command . ignores motions before the operator you use. So diw is .able but bdw isn't. Shawn M Moore P.S. Tony: sorry for sending this to you twice.. I need to configure gmail to reply to all automatically -_-
Re: button t useless?
zzapper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: alebo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: In fact VIM has many features that appear redundant but then one day (perhaps after many years) you realise their utility. In fact I've found that there is usually (always?) a subtle advantage in using one or other of a command which apparently does the same thing, and that in different circumstances one or the other will be superior. eg When the cursor is in the middle of a word you wish to delete diw has a distinct advantage over bdw But what is it? -- zzapper http://www.rayninfo.co.uk/vimtips.html
Re: button t useless?
On 25/04/07, Erlend Hamberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 25 April 2007 09:01:49 alebo wrote: Whats the reason vim has the function t which does the same as f, only moving to the character before? It seems useless to me; you can use f insted of t always, or...? If you want to change or delete text to a certain character it would be annoying to use f, as you then would have to retype that character. ;-) Brilliant! I didn't know about t before (thanks, alebo). I always need this in python, where _ is a word character, but you sometimes want to treat it as a word boundary. For example, suppose you have the cursor over o in the following: reactor.vent_radioactive_gas() ciw will replace the entire method vent_radioactive_gas But T_ct_ will replace just radioactive Cheers, Michael
Re: button t useless?
When the cursor is in the middle of a word you wish to delete
diw has a distinct advantage over bdw
But what is it?
I think it's the mental model.
diw is two mental steps: {action}{object} where {action} is
delete and {object} is iw even though that {object} is two
characters.
bdw, OTOH, has a 3-step mental model of
{prepare}{action}{motion} where you {prepare} with b, {action}
with d over {motion} with w.
When vimming, you begin to think in the flow okay...I want to
delete something [hit 'd'] and it's this thing [provide
object/motion]. The latter intrudes on this by requiring you to
not start your deletion action until you've prepared for it.
Or maybe that's just the warped way my own mind works :)
-tim
RE: button t useless?
This might not be a huge deal, but bdw is typed entirely with the left
hand if you're on a QWERTY keyboard (most people with English/US
keyboards) while diw switches hands. Unless you're pecking at the
keys with one hand, diw is simply much faster to type :)
Salman.
-Original Message-
From: Tim Chase [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:48 AM
To: zzapper
Cc: vim@vim.org
Subject: Re: button t useless?
When the cursor is in the middle of a word you wish to delete
diw has a distinct advantage over bdw
But what is it?
I think it's the mental model.
diw is two mental steps: {action}{object} where {action}
is delete and {object} is iw even though that {object} is
two characters.
bdw, OTOH, has a 3-step mental model of
{prepare}{action}{motion} where you {prepare} with b,
{action} with d over {motion} with w.
When vimming, you begin to think in the flow okay...I want
to delete something [hit 'd'] and it's this thing [provide
object/motion]. The latter intrudes on this by requiring
you to not start your deletion action until you've prepared for it.
Or maybe that's just the warped way my own mind works :)
-tim
Re: button t useless?
Hi, On 4/26/07, zzapper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: zzapper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: alebo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: In fact VIM has many features that appear redundant but then one day (perhaps after many years) you realise their utility. In fact I've found that there is usually (always?) a subtle advantage in using one or other of a command which apparently does the same thing, and that in different circumstances one or the other will be superior. eg When the cursor is in the middle of a word you wish to delete diw has a distinct advantage over bdw But what is it? The bdw command can be used to delete the current word only when the cursor is in the middle of the word. Also, this command cannot be used to delete single letter words. You have to then use 'x' to delete single letter words, 'dw' when the cursor is at the start of a word and 'bdw' when the cursor is not at the start of the word. The diw command can be used to delete the current word irrespective of the cursor position in the word and also to delete single letter words. This is particularly useful from a map command. - Yegappan
Re: button t useless?
On 4/26/07, Yegappan Lakshmanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On 4/26/07, zzapper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: zzapper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: alebo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: In fact VIM has many features that appear redundant but then one day (perhaps after many years) you realise their utility. In fact I've found that there is usually (always?) a subtle advantage in using one or other of a command which apparently does the same thing, and that in different circumstances one or the other will be superior. eg When the cursor is in the middle of a word you wish to delete diw has a distinct advantage over bdw But what is it? The bdw command can be used to delete the current word only when the cursor is in the middle of the word. Also, this command cannot be used to delete single letter words. You have to then use 'x' to delete single letter words, 'dw' when the cursor is at the start of a word and 'bdw' when the cursor is not at the start of the word. The diw command can be used to delete the current word irrespective of the cursor position in the word and also to delete single letter words. This is particularly useful from a map command. - Yegappan The subject may have been beaten to death by now, but one thing that happens to me a lot that proves the usefulness of t is this: Say you have the following line of text: Computer.open_close(cdrom) if your cursor is on the o and you want to delete till the (, dt( will do the trick, whereas dfe will not unless you do it twice. Honestly, I use t more because it fits my mental model better, like tim was talking about. -fREW
Re: button t useless?
Halim, Salman wrote: This might not be a huge deal, but bdw is typed entirely with the left hand if you're on a QWERTY keyboard (most people with English/US keyboards) while diw switches hands. Unless you're pecking at the keys with one hand, diw is simply much faster to type :) Salman. [...] I'm a one-handed typist (right-handed), and to me both are about equally bad on ergonomical grounds. I don't think of what I do as pecking however: I know where the keys are on my AZERTY keyboard, and I use all five fingers of my right hand, which is not riveted to a constant location over the keyboard: this makes for reasonably fast typing, maybe faster that some of you decadactylographers ;-) . I go with the previous argument however: bdw has the inconvenient of including a prepare step: bdw (move);(delete(word)) diw (delete((inner)word)) In my mental model, bdw is two steps, diw is one. Best regards, Tony.
Re: button t useless?
On Wednesday 25 April 2007 09:01:49 alebo wrote: Whats the reason vim has the function t which does the same as f, only moving to the character before? It seems useless to me; you can use f insted of t always, or...? If you want to change or delete text to a certain character it would be annoying to use f, as you then would have to retype that character. ;-) I use the t motion all the time. :-) -- Erlend Hamberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: button t useless?
technically and logically you are correct, however the human has an objective mind and required f AND t, also don't forget F AND T to move backwards. this in the case where a space may occur or not occur before a ( or other punctuation. you know the punctuation but without t/T you have to carefully examine the character before. try to use it a few times a day, see if it works for you? Erlend Hamberg wrote: On Wednesday 25 April 2007 09:01:49 alebo wrote: Whats the reason vim has the function t which does the same as f, only moving to the character before? It seems useless to me; you can use f insted of t always, or...? If you want to change or delete text to a certain character it would be annoying to use f, as you then would have to retype that character. ;-) I use the t motion all the time. :-)
Re: button t useless?
On 4/25/07, alebo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whats the reason vim has the function t which does the same as f, only moving to the character before? It seems useless to me; you can use f insted of t always, or...? I was using t (specifically ct) for years before I discovered f and still tend to use it more often.
