Comments on: efficient editing with VIM http://dan.hersam.com/2004/11/23/efficient-editing-with-vim/ A computer programmer's commentary on news, Linux, programming, music, web design, trivia, humor, usability and whatever else strikes his fancy at the time. Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:14:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: dan http://dan.hersam.com/2004/11/23/efficient-editing-with-vim/#comment-5039 dan Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:53:23 +0000 /?p=1068#comment-5039 I wasn't aware of : followed by the up arrow, but I tried it out and it is slightly different. q: shows several at a time, splitting the window, and as you know, : up arrow just goes through one at a time. I wasn’t aware of : followed by the up arrow, but I tried it out and it is slightly different. q: shows several at a time, splitting the window, and as you know, : up arrow just goes through one at a time.

]]> By: Levi http://dan.hersam.com/2004/11/23/efficient-editing-with-vim/#comment-5037 Levi Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:03:00 +0000 /?p=1068#comment-5037 Does q: do something different than : followed by the up arrow? I guess it's nice to have a version of it that doesn't require leaving the home row, even if they do the same thing. I'm not surprised it gets confused on perl code. I hate how heavy and complicated perl syntax is. Thanks for pointing these out, they look very useful. Does q: do something different than : followed by the up arrow? I guess it’s nice to have a version of it that doesn’t require leaving the home row, even if they do the same thing.

I’m not surprised it gets confused on perl code. I hate how heavy and complicated perl syntax is.

Thanks for pointing these out, they look very useful.

]]>