[NCLUG] [OT?] Vimium on Chromium on FreeBSD

[Chad Perrin]

On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 03:35:35PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Chad Perrin wrote:
> > * go forward and back through history with L and H, respectively
> 
> I think they missed the obvious defaults of using H and L for
> switching tabs left and right.  That makes a lot more sense to me than
> using J and K for tab-left and tab-right.  I switched that for me
> since I could never remember whether up was left or right.  H and L
> are keys that are obvious and I can get right the first time.

I actually tend to use gt and gT for switching right and left, which is
the same keybinding Vim actually uses for switching between its "tabs".
I just mentioned J and K because I had recently run across someone else's
mention of using them in Vimperator.  What would you use for Back and
Forward in browser history instead of H and L?


> 
> > * scroll up and down the page with k and j, respectively
> 
> And scroll horizonatally left and right with h and l.  Making all of
> h, j, k, l do all of the expected scrolling.

Right.


> 
> > * use a "link hints" system to navigate to a link with three or fewer
> >   keystrokes (the first of which is f, or F if I want it opening in a new
> >   tab, and the next one or two of which select the specific link)
> 
> I admit I find this very nice.  I have been looking for a Firefox
> plugin equivalent to this.  Dear Lazyweb, does one exist for Firefox?
> I haven't found one.  It is addicting.

Aside from Vimperator?  I haven't bothered looking for one aside from
Vimperator, because it gives me vi-like keybindings *including* that link
hints behavior in Firefox.


> 
> > Also . . . why would someone who's specifically talking about wanting a
> > vi-like experience want to use something that works like Emacs?
> 
> I am an Emacs user that wants emacs-keys when editing text.  But also
> uses 'less' and likes those keys for (more|less|most)-like browsing.
> I expect 'rogue' to use vi keys and not emacs keys.  I am not looking
> for something that completely changes the web browser environment like
> Vimperator or Conqueror.  (For that I can always run w3m inside Emacs.
> And I do.  Mostly during web development.  It's an awesome
> combination!)  I am perfectly fine using the strengths of both.

I find that Emacs users tend to appreciate vi-like keybindings in other
applications sometimes, while vi/Vim users do not tend to get as much out
of Emacs-like keybindings.  Maybe that's particular to the vi/Vim users I
know, though.  Anyway, that comment of mine was really just part of a
joke (the punchline of which you quoted below).


> 
> The most common problem for me is finger memory wanting to go to the
> beginning of line and inserting text there.  Sounds simple.  I do it
> all of the time.  In Emacs that is C-a to move to the beginning of
> line and then type.  With MS style keys the C-a selects all and the
> next character typed destroys it all.  In a standard browser text area
> there is no undo available at that point and all of my text is lost.
> I can't tell you how often that happens for me on an MS machine.  And
> so I am just looking for a web browser environment that feels like it
> was written by a Unix author and not an MS author.

I can think of two solutions for this:

1. Don't use MS Windows.  (Ha ha.  I kill me.)

2. Get a browser extension that allows you to edit text from a textarea
using an external editor, like ViewSourceWith for Firefox, and use it a
lot.


> 
> > Don't you know there's a *war* going on?
> 
> :-)
> 
> It is the MS "CUA" that aggravates me the most.  It is even starting
> to creep into Emacs upstream.  And because it is a basic operating
> model difference and in conflict with the traditional Unix models the
> end result is a completely different and for me undesirable result.

Do you mean the IBM Common User Access standard?  Yeah, I find that
pretty annoying, in that it forces me to move away from home row a lot
more than I would prefer.

Not to start any flame wars, or anything, but . . . I find that the GNU
Project (which pretty much runs the "standard" for Emacs) is
lackadaisical at best about any adherence to the Unix philosophy, and in
some cases appears to be actively hostile to that philosophy of software
design.  Though it comes as a little bit of a surprise to me that CUA is
sneaking into Emacs, it probably shouldn't.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.nclug.org/pipermail/nclug/attachments/20101105/9ae1d7c9/attachment.pgp>