|
Grex > Agora56 > #122: How to edit another file without save the current file in vi? | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 59 responses total. |
kingjon
|
|
response 25 of 59:
| 
Feb 23 21:59 UTC 2006 |
Because once you've passed the learning curve, it's the easiest editor to use.
|
naftee
|
|
response 26 of 59:
|
Feb 23 22:15 UTC 2006 |
oh. but it mustn't be the BEST editor, because here you guys are recommending
emacs for the job.
|
remmers
|
|
response 27 of 59:
|
Feb 23 22:24 UTC 2006 |
I'm the only one I've noticed recommending emacs. But I'm quite serious
about it. I prefer it for serious code development. I like vi for
quick editing jobs like editing config files or posting responses here.
"Best" is inherently a subjective judgement when it comes to editors, in
any case.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 28 of 59:
|
Feb 23 22:43 UTC 2006 |
re #23: Because it's efficient, lightweight, powerful, and can be found
already installed on a very wide array of systems.
However, I have to admit that when an improved vi alternative such as vim
or nvi are available, I generally use those instead.
|
twenex
|
|
response 29 of 59:
|
Feb 23 22:44 UTC 2006 |
Yeah. But friends don't let friends use nano! (shudder)
|
marcvh
|
|
response 30 of 59:
|
Feb 23 22:59 UTC 2006 |
I pretty much go along with Remmers's thoughts in #27. I would not try
to write a 10,000 line class library in vi; vi is for writing a 10 line
email message, or for editing /etc/foo.conf.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 31 of 59:
|
Feb 23 23:21 UTC 2006 |
re #30: There are modern vi variants with syntax highlighting,
code folding, and other programmer power features. I'll admit
that emacs has very nice integration with gcc and gdb but I'd
have no problems with using vi for the *editing* part of a large
project. The problem only comes in when you compare it to
options that provide a lot more functionality than just editing.
|
kingjon
|
|
response 32 of 59:
|
Feb 24 01:38 UTC 2006 |
Vi is my editor of choice for all pure-text word processing I do, except
perhaps entering responses in Picospan (because it erases the last responses in
my scroll-back buffer). The only reason I might not try to write a 10,000 line
library in vi is that jumping around would take minutes per jump due to the
immense size of the file -- and emacs would probably be worse on that score.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 33 of 59:
|
Feb 24 04:27 UTC 2006 |
It would be silly to put 10,000 lines of code into a single file, but I do
regularly open text files of that size in both vi and emacs, usually log
files for viewing. As long as the machine in question has sufficient memory
it's not a big deal.
|
jep
|
|
response 34 of 59:
|
Feb 24 19:14 UTC 2006 |
I use vi for viewing huge log files, too.
I have vim installed on my Windows machines at work and home. I need
it. I can do case-sensitive and pattern based searches in vi or vim
which I cannot do in any other editor available to me. I can also do
find and replace operations in vi or vim much more easily than in any
other editor available to me.
I don't use vi/vim for every situation, but I use Wordpad, Notepad and
MS Word (or 602Text) as required for different things. But I like vi
or vim the best and use them the most often.
|
remmers
|
|
response 35 of 59:
|
Feb 24 22:11 UTC 2006 |
I'll agree that vi excels at repetitive find-and-replace. If I'm in
emacs and want to do something like that, I switch emacs to vi-emulation
(by a single keystroke), do my find-and-replaces via the usual vi
keystrokes, then switch back to native emacs mode (also via a single
keystroke).
|
mcnally
|
|
response 36 of 59:
|
Feb 25 00:50 UTC 2006 |
What John doesn't tell you is that that "single keystroke" requires
a chord combination using six different modifier keys, plus the
EditMode key, a seventh key that isn't available on consumer-grade
keyboards produced for sale in the western hemisphere.
John can manage it because he's a concert-quality ragtime pianist
but if any of you were to try it without proper training your fingers
would snap like twigs.
|
remmers
|
|
response 37 of 59:
|
Feb 25 13:42 UTC 2006 |
Foof. The keystroke I'm talking about is control-Z.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 38 of 59:
|
Feb 25 19:34 UTC 2006 |
Well, you must've remapped it then.. :-p
|
naftee
|
|
response 39 of 59:
|
Feb 25 21:54 UTC 2006 |
poof
|
remmers
|
|
response 40 of 59:
|
Feb 26 21:31 UTC 2006 |
Re #38: Nope, control-Z is the DEEfault.
I should mention that another reason I use emacs these days is that by
installing the nxml plugin, you get the world's greatest XML (and hence
XHTML) editor. Color syntax highlighting, on-the-fly well-formedness
checking -- and if you've specified a RelaxNG schema, it checks schema
conformance on the fly too. Awesome!
|
mcnally
|
|
response 41 of 59:
|
Feb 26 22:43 UTC 2006 |
re #40:
> Nope, control-Z is the DEEfault.
Aha! Proof of a sinister conspiracy by the authors to render their
editor invulnerable to job control, thus preventing their hapless
victims from suspending the emacs process. Eeeeeevil! :-p
|
fudge
|
|
response 42 of 59:
|
Feb 27 10:22 UTC 2006 |
I already pepper my files with ":w" 's when in gui editors... if I started
using something like emacs I'd be f**ked
|
remmers
|
|
response 43 of 59:
|
Feb 28 14:11 UTC 2006 |
Re #41: When ctrl-z is bound to vi mode switching, you can suspend emacs
by typing ctrl-x ctrl-z.
Re #42: Emacs' file-save command is ctrl-x ctrl-s, which is easier to
type than vi's :w.
|
twenex
|
|
response 44 of 59:
|
Feb 28 14:12 UTC 2006 |
<twenex raises one eyebrow>
|
fudge
|
|
response 45 of 59:
|
Feb 28 14:35 UTC 2006 |
hmm yeah but most of those key presses could do something potentially much
more nasty than putting a ":w" in a file, given that most control-##
combinations are mapped to commonly used functionality like copy/cut/paste,
undo, print... maybe 15 years ago, but today, I'm quite reluctant to embrace
an app that works completely different from the rest of the OS/Desktop/apps
|
gull
|
|
response 46 of 59:
|
Mar 4 00:30 UTC 2006 |
I don't like vi for that reason. The modal design is too different
from every other app I use.
|
kingjon
|
|
response 47 of 59:
|
Mar 4 00:58 UTC 2006 |
I *like* vi for that reason. Every other application requires me to move my
fingers too far.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 48 of 59:
|
Mar 4 03:32 UTC 2006 |
Re #46: that's just because you don't use rogue (or hack or nethack)
|
gull
|
|
response 49 of 59:
|
Mar 7 22:21 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:47: I dunno. The Esc key is way up there in the corner.
|