Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

80884Re: OT: Vi in a browser...

Expand Messages
  • Edward L. Fox
    Jun 3, 2007
      Hi Pan,

      On 6/4/07, panshizhu@... <panshizhu@...> wrote:
      > [...]
      > When this is just a pain, why not just map ^A to your 1GVG<ctl-del> ?
      >
      > So this come back to the topic:
      >
      > If anyone approaching to emulate vim in a browser without actually calling
      > vim, will it reads your .vimrc and to know you had mapped ^A to
      > 1GVG<ctl-del> ? unlikely.

      Well, personally I think the thing you should do is getting familiar
      with Vi-like editing styles, not mapping Vim to adapter your existing
      editing styles.

      For example, in the other editors, if you want to copy the whole
      article into the clipboard, you should first select all, then copy the
      selected text into the clipboard. In Vim, "select all" is a pain. So
      you mapped it to an easier shortcut.

      But... But do we really need to select all first before copying the
      text into the clipboard? Of course not. You can use "yank + motion" to
      do it, like this: gg"+yG, it only costs 6 keystrokes. You can also use
      ex command to do it, like this: :%y+, it only costs 4 keystrokes.

      Well, maybe you would say, in the other editor, <c-a><c-c> is only 2
      keystrokes. Yes, but to me, combination keys with Ctrl is much more
      difficult to press than combination keys with Shift only. So I prefer
      :%y+ to <c-a><c-c>. By the way, that's the primary reason that I
      dislike Emacs.

      > Then I don't think it makes too much sense reinventing a vi-like inside
      > javascript.
      >
      > —— After all, javascript *is* slow and I cannot afford to pay the overhead
      > in any serious application. In most web-sites, disabling javascript is just
      > something like upgrade my CPU from P4 to Core 2 Duo.

      As an experienced AJAX developer (:-P), I would responsibly tell you,
      update a few fields inside a web page with AJAX is much much faster
      than entirely refresh the page, especially when this refreshing
      happens frequently.

      > --
      > Sincerely, Pan, Shi Zhu. ext: 2606

      Regards,

      Edward L. Fox
    • Show all 18 messages in this topic