 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Vincent Le Chevalier wrote:
>>
>> It's not that Vim is a bad product - I'm not sure how any possible
>> text-mode program could possibly overcome these limitations. They seem
>> to be inherant in the description "text-mode program" rather than
>> specific to Vim itself...
>>
>
> But all of these flaws are fixed in GUI versions of Vim, including Cream
> and probably WinVi.
OK. Well if I get time, maybe I'll try it...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> None of these things quite compares to "I want to put the cursor *here*..."
you can just click there. or type /word or ?word (reverse) and use "n" (next)
until you reach precisely where you want.
> > you're insane: "3y}"
>
> ...riiiiight. *I* am insane? ;-)
Every software has its quirks. Read that as "Yank 3 blocks", "}" used because
of its widespread use in computer programming as a block terminator. Now, I
understand "CTRL+C" as copy, because of C, but why Paste uses "v"?! quirks...
> Doesn't much seem to resemble the little program I end up having to use
> when I'm trying to fix a broken Linux install where /etc/fstab is messed
> up or some such and I need to edit it.
well, that's an unusual situation, don't you agree? In there, everything is
limited, and it's just you, the kernel, a basic shell and good ol' basic vi...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
>>> you're insane: "3y}"
>> ...riiiiight. *I* am insane? ;-)
>
> Every software has its quirks. Read that as "Yank 3 blocks", "}" used because
> of its widespread use in computer programming as a block terminator. Now, I
> understand "CTRL+C" as copy, because of C, but why Paste uses "v"?! quirks...
I can only imagine that it's Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V and Ctrl+X because they're
all right next to each other on a standard keyboard. But yeah, that's
pretty random. (Not to mention Ctrl+Z... I guess Ctrl+U is pretty hard
to type.)
>> Doesn't much seem to resemble the little program I end up having to use
>> when I'm trying to fix a broken Linux install where /etc/fstab is messed
>> up or some such and I need to edit it.
>
> well, that's an unusual situation, don't you agree? In there, everything is
> limited, and it's just you, the kernel, a basic shell and good ol' basic vi...
If I knew more about not breaking Linux in the first place I might
agree. :-}
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Doesn't much seem to resemble the little program I end up having to use
> when I'm trying to fix a broken Linux install where /etc/fstab is messed
> up or some such and I need to edit it. You certainly can't get more than
> 80 characters on screen there - because the terminal window is only 80
> characters wide.
Feel free to use framebuffer and shoot anything like 1920x1200 with 24
or 32-bit colors on the screen (or whatever resolution your monitor and
graphics controller support). It's even possible to choose the font ;).
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> Doesn't much seem to resemble the little program I end up having to use
>> when I'm trying to fix a broken Linux install where /etc/fstab is messed
>> up or some such and I need to edit it. You certainly can't get more than
>> 80 characters on screen there - because the terminal window is only 80
>> characters wide.
>
> Feel free to use framebuffer and shoot anything like 1920x1200 with 24
> or 32-bit colors on the screen (or whatever resolution your monitor and
> graphics controller support). It's even possible to choose the font ;).
Funny you should say that - on my PC at home, I usually have to disable
framebuffer support on Linux live CDs to prevent the machine crashing...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen <aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
> Feel free to use framebuffer and shoot anything like 1920x1200 with 24
> or 32-bit colors on the screen
don't give him more ideas for crashing! ;)
let's be productive...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 wrote:
...
> NB. "Emacs" is an operating system, not a text editor. :-P
"Emacs was originally a text editor, but it became a way of
life and a religion."
http://www.stallman.org/saint.html
--
Tor Olav
http://subcube.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Eero Ahonen wrote:
> > Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> >> I used to use Notepad to write everything. As some of you might know,
> >> Notepad sucks.
> >
> > It can suck? I tought it's *totally* useless :O
>
> "The only time Micro$oft will make something that doesn't suck, they'll
> be making vacuum cleaners."
>
> (BTW, I keep waiting for Apple to make a vacuum cleaner. They could call
> it "iSuck"...)
>
> >> Does anybody have a better suggestion for text editors that work on
> >> Windoze?
> >
> > http://www.winvi.de/en/download.html
>
> Vi? :-S
>
> --
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
> http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Orchid:
ROFL
ok stop its not that funny
ROFL (again)
ok stop its not that funny
I'll say wordpad for being a windoze victim, but clearly one of the better off
victims.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> and when you want to go back to previous stops, "CTRL+O" goes back through the
> location stack...
Oooo! Thank you! :-)
> Vim has had multiple buffers and even sessions for ages now. I'm sure you're
> using just limited ol' vi in some ancient Unix...
One advantage of vi is that the simple stuff is the same everywhere. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > and when you want to go back to previous stops, "CTRL+O" goes back through the
> > location stack...
>
> Oooo! Thank you! :-)
lots of other handy goodies like that. try :help
> > Vim has had multiple buffers and even sessions for ages now. I'm sure you're
> > using just limited ol' vi in some ancient Unix...
>
> One advantage of vi is that the simple stuff is the same everywhere. :-)
one advantage of vim is that complex stuff is done the same with the same ease
everywhere too. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
