Can even read in (or write out) the output of such command - into the editor buffer, or out to another file - and can even the editor buffer or part thereof into such command - and replace that with the output of the command.
Yes, can do that in vi/ex/vim as well too. when using script(1) or documenting to some log record or the like)īeing able to run any command and still be in Ed is ridiculously helpful. In fact used it again within the past 24 hours, leveraging one of it's advantages - easily documenting in place (e.g. vim isn't very vi compatible, even in vim's "compatible" mode.Įd is lovely. Yeah, in case you didn't guess I'm not a huge fan of vim. bloody vim that doesn't work - end the command with for an ex command in visual mode in vim, and damn bloody vim cancels the entire command entry. Don't even get me started about vim annoyances though. One of the few slight differences between an ex command in visual mode in vi/nvi is you can end the command with. But likewise, if you're in ex mode and do nothing to switch to visual mode, it leaves you in ex mode. Then everything you're typing after that is in fact an ex command - and after that, if you were in visual mode and don't switch to ex mode, it takes you back to visual mode. In fact, in vi and vim and nvi, if you're in visual mode and type : Likewise go into ex mode, or start in ex mode by invoking it as ex - and no, not two separate programs - same program, different modes. It basically just spits out the output you want and then keeps it there on the terminal. Invoke it as ex, or from visual mode, issue the command Qĭespite vims ability to run commands, they are basically two separate programs that have no ability to interact with one another. or if you need an integrated development environment (IDE) - to deal with certain languages and have certain features/capabilities with that/those languages - then not relevant to compare to something that can't do that.Ĭhange what vim is dreaming about, go into ex mode. visual screen oriented editing - then not relevant to compare to an editor that doesn't do that. But if you need to do different things that aren't compatible - e.g. if all that needs be done is some simple line-oriented editing, well, then comparing relevant tools that can do that - that's then a relevant comparison. mostly a dumbed down more limited version of ed - syntax is slightly different, no regular expressions at all, otherwise kind'a similar to ed.īut. Heck, even when Microsoft did a first editor on MS-DOS, did they do notepad, no, 'caused they didn't even have a GUI then, did they do vi? Well, they probably should have, but. but the damn thing isn't even CLI nor does it offer that - we're on r/commandline after all. Well, if all you need is dead simple and about zero features or whatever, uhm, yeah, notepad will about do that. It's nowhere near what even ed could do decade(s) earlier than the mere existence of notepad.īecause they like it and they don't need something else ed is a perfectly good line oriented editor - and a damn fine one at that. New laws of physics is needed to make something that Vim can't do. Vim is a great little editor, but it cannot do what Ed does.Įd is a great little editor, but it cannot do what Vim does. There are probably more ways of doing it, but Vim can do almost everything you can imagine. It could just read the file and grep those lines, show it in a separate buffer in example. I am curious about why you would want clear the screen, if you are editing the file? What is the purpose of it doing in Vim?įor the search and show functionality, you could probably do that very easily by creating a simple remap. I didn't touch the other topics, but you bring it up again.Ĭan you run clear in vim and clear the screen?Īlso, when you search for a line or multiple lines, will vim only show those lines, sliced out of the text?Īre these the only features you can do in Ed? Vim can do much more. So you was wrong about that, because Vim can do that. First of all, I was talking about the command you run.
0 kommentar(er)
