
Some thoughts on Emacs and Vim - codeup
https://zuttobenkyou.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/some-thoughts-on-emacs-and-vim/
======
slysf
Having to support what I write in production situations let me to choose vim
over emacs long ago. The biggest con about emacs that's not mentioned is that
it's just not _everywhere_. Even if I have to log into a firewall to make some
emergency change, odds are even that has vi installed. When you start looking
at doing embedded work this is even more of an issue. It's hard to rapidly
iterate on a prototype when you have to make a change in your sandbox in order
to use your editor of choice. YMMV of course.

------
samvelst
"Vim’s Normal mode lets me fly around a document"

Isn't this just because he is more experienced in Vim? I'm not an expert in
any case, but is it really true that Vim is that much faster (editing-wise)
than Emacs?

I'm guessing that everyone's editor of choice would be the one they're most
comfortable in. In other words, the one in which they've invested the most
time into learning.

~~~
dilap
I dunno, I'm a longtime emacs user/addict, and I get the feeling that its
actual editing commands just aren't that well thought out -- because of this,
I've flirted with trying to use vim and vimpulse (an emacs vim emulator), but
it's super-hard to get away from emacs once you're used to it...

I'd be interested to hear if anyone else has moved from emacs to vim. (Or
thoughts of people who've gone the other way.)

~~~
copper
I dunno, I tend to prefer the emacs movement keys over vim. I-search to move
around in emacs, in combination with C+A+f/b is (usually) fairly fast - though
a fairly good reason for that might be because I know the structure of what I
edit. As for someone who moved from emacs to vim, I cannot resist posting this
particular link :)

<http://notinventedhe.re/on/2010-12-22>

~~~
dilap
Well, I could be wrong, but it's just a sneaking feeling that vim might be
faster. But I've never been able to stick w/ it long enough to know for
sure....

But e.g., stuff like "." the e/E and b/B distinction, [d]f (like zap-to-char
but waaay more useful) don't really have emacs equivalents.

And come on, C-f, C-b, C-n, C-p to move around -- not smart! I assume it's for
"forward, backward, next, previous", but you shouldn't choose your most basic
motion keys to have memorable names, you should choose them to be efficient!

~~~
silentbicycle
In emacs, repeat is C-x z, and then keep pressing z. (C-x zzzzzzzzzzzz...)

While M-f, M-b are e and b, I don't know of an exact equivalent for E and B.
But they could very easily be _added_.

IMHO, basic editing in Emacs has slightly higher constant factors (mostly due
to typing the modifier keys), but scales much better as operations become more
complex.

~~~
dilap
Cool tip about C-x z, buuut... Playing with it a little bit, it doesn't seem
to fit so well with a non-modal editor, because "last command" ends up being
more like "last keystroke". E.g., if I write "I like cats" and then hit "C-x
z", it enters..."s". Probably a more practical emacs equivalent is to just
quickly record and replay a macro.

As for adding equivalents to E and B, sure, but what keys do you bind 'em to?
Either unwieldy C-c FOO combinations, or spend the rest of forever playing
whack-a-mole with various modes that happen to have already defined the keys
you wanted to use. While emacs _is_ infinitely customizable, the baseline
editing functionality that everything expects is important -- otherwise you're
just fighting against the grain. Though the various vim emulation modes have
made a heroic effort...

It would be interesting if something like that vim keystroke competition could
be expanded to include emacs as well. >:)

~~~
silentbicycle
The repeat has different granularity. I prefer Emacs's, but, matter of taste I
guess.

"Super"-f/b are free on my keyboard, where "super" is the button with the
Windows logo on it. I don't really miss the E/B functionality, though, and I
used vim for about five years before I started using Emacs.

~~~
dilap
Ah, I was wondering how much vim experience you had. Quite a bit! Well, thanks
for being an interesting data point. :)

(BTW/FWIW, I'm on mac and keep the option key as command, so no extra key
lying around for me to use as super.)

~~~
silentbicycle
I know this is a late reply, but you're very right about C-x z and vi's .
having different groupings. I'm so used to defining keyboard macros for any
operation I want to repeat as a whole that it didn't even occur to me.

I'm easily sucked into vi / emacs threads, and I've talked about this at
length a few times. I have a bit over five year experience with each, at this
point. I prefer vi's general keyboard interface design (edit vs insert mode,
etc.), because it gets rid of most of the modal keys that Emacs uses, but
strongly prefer Emacs's "continuous environment"/integration and general
extensibility. On the balance, I prefer Emacs. (And while there are vi-
emulation modes for Emacs, such as viper, few extensions provide vi-like
keybindings for them.)

------
d0mine
_It’s a scripting language but it doesn’t even have case/switch statements._
</quote>

The same could be said about Python.

~~~
silentbicycle
They're included in dictionary usage. Having a separate case statement would
be redundant. Lua does the same thing.

------
delackner
This article lead to me reading about vim's undo branches feature, something
that I had really wanted for a long time but just didn't notice existed.
Thanks!

[http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/undo.html#undo-
branche...](http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/undo.html#undo-branches)

------
gaiusparx
Why I choose Emacs [http://eatingair.com/post/2829859704/why-i-choose-emacs-
over...](http://eatingair.com/post/2829859704/why-i-choose-emacs-over-vim)

------
bradtgmurray
On a somewhat related note, are there any tutorials out there for a guide to
emacs and org-mode for vim users?

