rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu (04/15/91)
I have always wondered about the choice of the {h,j,k,l} keys for
cursor movement in vi. What was the rational behind it?
Wouldn't it have been more natural to adopt the {j,k,l,;} keys
for cursor movement instead? Aren't the {j,k,l,;} keys the standard
left hand's "home" keys for touch-typists? Does it mean that the
designer(s) of vi were not touch-typists themselves?
I find it somewhat annoying to have to move my fingers away from the
"home" position to move the cursor. Does anyone consider the usual {h,j,k,l}
choice natural? Does anyone have an explanation for the choice?
--
Rouben Rostamian Telephone: (301) 455-2458
Department of Mathematics and Statistics e-mail:
University of Maryland Baltimore County bitnet: rostamian@umbc.bitnet
Baltimore, MD 21228, U.S.A. internet: rouben@math9.math.umbc.eduxcarey@cucstud.UUCP (Christian Carey) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu>, rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu writes: > Does anyone consider the usual {h,j,k,l} > choice natural? Does anyone have an explanation for the choice? I believe the choice of those keys was derived from their "Ctrl" combinations --h for Ctrl H (ASCII BS, backspace, thus left); j for Ctrl J (ASCII LF, linefeed, hence down); k for Ctrl K (ASCII VT, vertical tab, therefore up); and l for Ctrl L (ASCII FF, form feed, well, three out of four isn't bad B^J). Crispy -- "It is a question of cubic capacity; a man with so large a brain must have something inside it."--Sherlock Holmes, _The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle_ Christian Carey (size 8 hat (USA)) uunet!cucstud!xcarey
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu> rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu () writes: > I have always wondered about the choice of the {h,j,k,l} keys for > cursor movement in vi. What was the rational behind it? The adm3a terminal has arrows on those keys, because ^H, ^J, ^K, and ^L are their almost-straight-ASCII cursor control characters. The "vi" editor was developed at Berkeley, where 90% of the terminals were adm3 or 3a. > Does it mean that the > designer(s) of vi were not touch-typists themselves? You'll have to ask them. Given the Sun keyboards, I suspect not. In any case, give the user population and the available hardware it was a reasonable choice. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
consp04@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Dan Boyd) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu> you write: |> I have always wondered about the choice of the {h,j,k,l} keys for |> cursor movement in vi. What was the rational behind it? The old ADM-3 terminals had arrows on the h, j, k, and l keys. That's the entire reason why. Daniel F. Boyd consp04@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu CONTACT ALIENS BOTH BENEVOLENT AND EVIL! DON'T STIR OR DISTURB THE RICE! 210526315789473684
dattier@vpnet.chi.il.us (David W. Tamkin) (04/16/91)
rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu (Rouben Rostamian) wrote in <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu>: | I have always wondered about the choice of the {h,j,k,l} keys for | cursor movement in vi. What was the rational [sic] behind it? | Wouldn't it have been more natural to adopt the {j,k,l,;} keys | for cursor movement instead? Aren't the {j,k,l,;} keys the standard | left hand's "home" keys for touch-typists? You must have meant the right hand, unless you were typing by looking in a mirror over your shoulder. Anyhow, ... You speak as if a direct press down on the key already under the finger were somehow more "natural" than moving a finger to any other key. Perhaps the choice was the designers' idea of natural logic over any of natural finger weight. ^H means backspace and ^J linefeed, so it's easier on the brain -- at least it's been easier on my brain -- to learn and remember h as the synonym of ^H and j as the synonym of ^J. The decision on cursor movement has to go through the brain anyway; heck, the brain has to make it in the first place. | I find it somewhat annoying to have to move my fingers away from the | "home" position to move the cursor. Does anyone consider the usual {h,j,k,l} | choice natural? Does anyone have an explanation for the choice? Do you actually displace your entire right hand one key to the left to hold a finger over each of the cursor movement keys instead of keeping your hand in its usual place and using your right index for both the h and the j? As for whether the designers of vi were touch-typists themselves, I think the idea was one key for each direction of cursor movement, not one cursor movement for each of the fingers positioned on the keyboard. David Tamkin PO Box 7002 Des Plaines IL 60018-7002 dattier@vpnet.chi.il.us GEnie:D.W.TAMKIN CIS:73720,1570 MCIMail:426-1818 708 518 6769 312 693 0591 "Parker Lewis Can't Lose" mailing list: flamingo-request@esd.sgi.com (relay) flamingo-request@ddsw1.mcs.com (digest)
jallen@libserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (Joseph Allen) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu> rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu () writes: >I have always wondered about the choice of the {h,j,k,l} keys for >cursor movement in vi. What was the rational behind it? >Wouldn't it have been more natural to adopt the {j,k,l,;} keys >for cursor movement instead? Aren't the {j,k,l,;} keys the standard >left hand's "home" keys for touch-typists? Does it mean that the >designer(s) of vi were not touch-typists themselves? h is from ^H, backspace. j is from ^J linefeed. These and the rest are chosen because on an ADM3A terminal hjkl had arrows painted on them. -- #define h 23 /* Height */ /* jallen@ic.sunysb.edu (129.49.12.74) */ #define w 79 /* Width */ /* Amazing */ int i,r,b[]={-w,w,1,-1},d,a[w*h];m(p){a[p]=2;while(d=(p>2*w?!a[p-w-w]?1:0:0)|( p<w*(h-2)?!a[p+w+w]?2:0:0)|(p%w!=w-2?!a[p+2]?4:0:0)|(p%w!=1?!a[p-2]?8:0:0)){do i=3&(r=(r*57+1))/d;while(!(d&(1<<i)));a[p+b[i]]=2;m(p+2*b[i]);}}main(){r=time( 0L);m(w+1);for(i=0;i%w?0:printf("\n"),i!=w*h;i++)printf("#\0 "+a[i]);}
alan@ukpoit.co.uk (Alan Barclay) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu> rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu () writes: >Wouldn't it have been more natural to adopt the {j,k,l,;} keys >for cursor movement instead? Aren't the {j,k,l,;} keys the standard >left hand's "home" keys for touch-typists? Does it mean that the >designer(s) of vi were not touch-typists themselves? Fairly obviously the designers of vi wern't touch typists, for two reasons: 1) As you say, the home is one character off. 2) If you're a touch typist then 'u','d','l','r' seems as natural as you can get.... -- Alan Barclay iT | E-mail : alan@ukpoit.uucp Barker Lane | BANG-STYLE : .....!ukc!ukpoit!alan CHESTERFIELD S40 1DY | VOICE : +44 246 214241
em@dce.ie (Eamonn McManus) (04/16/91)
rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu () writes: >I have always wondered about the choice of the {h,j,k,l} keys for >cursor movement in vi. What was the rational behind it? ^H and ^J are backspace and linefeed respectively in ASCII. Lear-Siegler ADM3a terminals, which were popular when vi was first written, extend this by interpreting ^K and ^L as cursor up and cursor right, respectively, and have arrow markings on the hjkl keys that correspond to vi's usage. , Eamonn
dws@margay.cs.wisc.edu (DaviD W. Sanderson) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu> rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu () writes: >I have always wondered about the choice of the {h,j,k,l} keys for >cursor movement in vi. What was the rational behind it? >Does anyone have an explanation for the choice? If I remember correctly, certain terminals have arrows marked on the hjkl keys that happen to correspond to what hjkl do in vi. Perhaps this is a coincidence, but I don't think so. I don't remember which terminals they were. Perhaps a posting to alt.folklore.computers would elicit more information? DaviD W. Sanderson (dws@cs.wisc.edu) -- ___ / __\ U N S H I N E DaviD W. Sanderson | | | I N E dws@cs.wisc.edu _____| | |_____ ________ \ / \ |__/ /////__ Fusion Powered Locomotives Made to Order \____/ \__|_/ \\\\\______ (TARDIS model available at extra cost)
zvr@ntua.gr (Alexios Zavras) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu>, rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu writes: > Aren't the {j,k,l,;} keys the standard > left hand's "home" keys for touch-typists? If you ever see a touch-typist have his LEFT hand over {j,k,l,;}, don't count on his/her efficiency... :-) More seriously, some older terminals had the arrows on these keys (I remember a certain Zenith...) -- zvr -- +---------------------------+ Alexios Zavras (-zvr-) | H eytyxia den exei enoxes | zvr@ntua.gr +-----------------------zvr-+ zvr@theseas.ntua.gr Somebody said it couldn't be done / But he with a chuckle replied, Maybe it couldn't, but he would be one / Who never said no till he tried. So he buckled right in / With a brace and a grin And if he was worried, he hid it, He started to sing / As he tackled the thing That couldn't be done And he did it.
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.183245.12661@vpnet.chi.il.us> dattier@vpnet.chi.il.us (David W. Tamkin) writes: > Do you actually displace your entire right hand one key to the left to hold a > finger over each of the cursor movement keys instead of keeping your hand in > its usual place and using your right index for both the h and the j? I do, but I'm not a touch-typist. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
bill@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com (Bill Frolik) (04/16/91)
> for cursor movement instead? Aren't the {j,k,l,;} keys the standard > left hand's "home" keys for touch-typists? Does it mean that the ^^^^^^^^^^^ Only if you're trying to touch-type with the keyboard upside down. > I find it somewhat annoying to have to move my fingers away from the > "home" position to move the cursor. Does anyone consider the usual {h,j,k,l} > choice natural? Does anyone have an explanation for the choice? I find it annoying, too -- it's one more reason why I prefer Emacs over vi. I'm a fairly fast touch-typist, and you'd have a hard time convincing me that any touch-typist would initially consider it "natural". If, however, you use only your right hand and DON'T put your left hand on the keyboard, it seems to become a somewhat more natural place for one's fingers to fall (if that means anything). ___________________________________________ Bill Frolik Hewlett-Packard Co. hp-pcd!bill Corvallis, Oregon bill@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com (503)750-4082
shore@theory.tn.cornell.edu (Melinda Shore) (04/17/91)
In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu> rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu () writes: >Aren't the {j,k,l,;} keys the standard >left hand's "home" keys for touch-typists? Does it mean that the >designer(s) of vi were not touch-typists themselves? Yup, touch-typists have to shift their right hand one key to the left. I am a touch typist, and after years of using vi my right hand is now permanently stuck with my index finger on 'h'. -- Software longa, hardware brevis Melinda Shore - Cornell Information Technologies - shore@theory.tn.cornell.edu
night@jec311.its.rpi.edu (Trip Martin) (04/17/91)
alan@ukpoit.co.uk (Alan Barclay) writes: >Fairly obviously the designers of vi wern't touch typists, for two >reasons: >1) As you say, the home is one character off. >2) If you're a touch typist then 'u','d','l','r' seems as natural as >you can get.... Speak for yourself. I'm a touch typist, and find h, j, k, and l quite natural (and more natural than u,d,l,r). As for being one character off home row, having to reach over to the "h" character occasionally is no big deal. In fact, it saves my pinky which already gets overused for hitting shift, "/" and return all the time. This is really a religious issue. I wish people wouldn't make blanket statements about preferences like the above based on only their own experience. -- Trip Martin night@rpi.edu -- Trip Martin night@rpi.edu
soh@shiva.trl.oz (kam hung soh) (04/17/91)
alan@ukpoit.co.uk (Alan Barclay) writes: >2) If you're a touch typist then 'u','d','l','r' seems as natural as >you can get.... Ahhh, but this implied the typist had to be English. If he were Malay or Indonesian, it would be 'Atas', 'Bawah', 'Kiri', 'Kanan' (unfortunately, I don't know of an easy word which describes "left" and "right" with a different first letter.) I wonder what they would be in other languages? To quote from a paper by Bill Joy in 1980 (`An Introduction to Display Editing with Vi'): "If you don't have cursor positioning keys, or even if you do, you can use the h j k and l keys as cursor positioning keys (these are labelled with arrows on an adm3a)." To try to justify this choice for other terminals, there is a footnote to the previous statement: "As we will see later, h moved back to the left (like control-h which is a backspace), j moves down (in the same column), k moves up (in the same column), and l moves to the right. Regards, -------------- Soh, Kam Hung email: h.soh@trl.oz.au tel: +61 03 541 6403 Telecom Research Laboratories, P.O. Box 249, Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia
brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) (04/17/91)
In article <1991Apr15.211355.7919@ukpoit.co.uk> alan@ukpoit.co.uk (Alan Barclay) writes: > Fairly obviously the designers of vi wern't touch typists, for two > reasons: > 1) As you say, the home is one character off. I have to disagree with this. First, I use jk much more than hl---there are lots of fast ways to move around within a line, and hl are really only for slow work. Second, I almost never need to switch instantly between j and h. Third, the pinky is often busy moving back and forth to Return, so for l's it's faster to use the ring finger. Fourth, vi lets you redefine keys so easily that this is hardly a major issue. Finally, the choice of keys was, as others have pointed out, dictated by the arrow markings on ADM terminals. > 2) If you're a touch typist then 'u','d','l','r' seems as natural as > you can get.... Mnemonic, yes; natural for a touch typist, no. The fastest motion is alternating keys between hands (and I'd love to see someone try to design a keyboard for this---Dvorak doesn't take digraphs into account). The second-fastest is between fingers far apart on one hand. In any case it is very slow to switch between keys on different rows. I might pick d for up, k for down, f for left (or some more useful leftwards motion), and j for right (or rightwards), just because they're so easy to type. ---Dan
tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) (04/17/91)
From the keyboard of shore@theory.tn.cornell.edu (Melinda Shore):
:In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu> rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu () writes:
:>Aren't the {j,k,l,;} keys the standard
:>left hand's "home" keys for touch-typists? Does it mean that the
:>designer(s) of vi were not touch-typists themselves?
:
:Yup, touch-typists have to shift their right hand one key to the
:left. I am a touch typist, and after years of using vi my right
:hand is now permanently stuck with my index finger on 'h'.
Well, I'm a touch typest and I don't do that, because
I seldom use h to move right. I usually use b or F or T,
possibly with numeric prefixes.
--tompeter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) (04/17/91)
In article <h9kg=q+@rpi.edu>, night@jec311.its.rpi.edu (Trip Martin) writes: > This is really a religious issue. I wish people wouldn't make > blanket statements about preferences like the above based on > only their own experience. This paragraph should be engraved on the keyboard of every user before they're allowed to post to usenet. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
lewis@tramp.Colorado.EDU (LEWIS WILLIAM M JR) (04/18/91)
In the hope of killing this subject once and for all: At the time Bill Joy wrote vi, the Lear Siegler ADM-3 and ADM-3A were among the lower cost CRT terminals available and the hjkl keys indeed were marked with arrows.
martelli@cadlab.sublink.ORG (Alex Martelli) (04/18/91)
soh@shiva.trl.oz (kam hung soh) writes: :alan@ukpoit.co.uk (Alan Barclay) writes: :>2) If you're a touch typist then 'u','d','l','r' seems as natural as :>you can get.... : :Ahhh, but this implied the typist had to be English. If he were Malay :or Indonesian, it would be 'Atas', 'Bawah', 'Kiri', 'Kanan' :(unfortunately, I don't know of an easy word which describes "left" :and "right" with a different first letter.) I wonder what they would :be in other languages? Italian has Sinistra (left) and Destra (right), clearly a language designed for Wordstar with its Ctrl-S for left and Ctrl-D for right [unfortunately this does not generalize to E and X...:-]. -- Alex Martelli - CAD.LAB s.p.a., v. Stalingrado 53, Bologna, Italia Email: (work:) martelli@cadlab.sublink.org, (home:) alex@am.sublink.org Phone: (work:) ++39 (51) 371099, (home:) ++39 (51) 250434; Fax: ++39 (51) 366964 (work only), Fidonet: 332/401.3 (home only).
phil@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Phil Gustafson) (04/20/91)
In article <1991Apr15.021544.19067@umbc3.umbc.edu> rouben@math16.math.umbc.edu () writes: >I have always wondered about the choice of the {h,j,k,l} keys for >cursor movement in vi. What was the rational behind it? To maintain compatibility with rogue. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Opinions outside attributed quotations are mine alone. Satirical material may not be specifically labeled as such. It was that way when I got here. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- | phil@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG | Phil Gustafson | {ames|pyramid|vsi1}!zorch!phil | UN*X/graphics consultant | sgi!gsi!phil | 1550 Martin Ave., San Jose CA 95126 | phil@gsi | 408/286-1749
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (04/23/91)
In article <110300005@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com> bill@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com (Bill Frolik) writes: >> I find it somewhat annoying to have to move my fingers away from the >> "home" position to move the cursor. Does anyone consider the usual {h,j,k,l} >> choice natural? Does anyone have an explanation for the choice? >I find it annoying, too -- it's one more reason why I prefer Emacs over vi. Huh? The emacs equivalents of ^B,^N,^P,^F and not only not on the home row but they take both hands (or long pinkies). I always use the space bar to move forward which is the only direction you should be going unless you have made a mistake anyway. >I'm a fairly fast touch-typist, and you'd have a hard time convincing >me that any touch-typist would initially consider it "natural". Why should cursor-movement be "natural" for a touch typist. If you are typing text in, you really don't do much cursor positioning other than forward (space/tab) or down (enter). For more than a backspace/retype kind of correction you are probably far enough away from the desired point that a "search" type command or "go to beginning/end of object" would be more effective than banging on a single-step motion key. >If, however, you use only your right hand and DON'T put your left hand on >the keyboard, it seems to become a somewhat more natural place for one's >fingers to fall (if that means anything). Aha - that's why I like vi! I can drink coffee with my left hand while browsing through files with my right. Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us
jkaidor@synoptics.COM (Jerome Kaidor) (04/24/91)
In article <767@cadlab.sublink.ORG> martelli@cadlab.sublink.ORG (Alex Martelli) writes: > >Italian has Sinistra (left) and Destra (right), clearly a language designed >for Wordstar with its Ctrl-S for left and Ctrl-D for right [unfortunately >this does not generalize to E and X...:-]. *********** WORDSTAR RULES!!! ********* The wordstar key mappings have nothing to do with the letters or sounds associated with the particular keys. Rather, a logical cursor diamond is formed that falls under the left hand, without it EVER LEAVING THE HOME KEYS. This is of crucial importance to a touch-typist! I consider the few hours I spent learning the wordstar key layout, so many years ago, to be the best learning investment I ever made. Nowadays, I customize every editor I use to behave like wordstar( EVE/TPU took a couple days, Brief was easy ). Moving the CTRL key down to the bottom of the AT keyboard was the worst thing IBM ever did. I think I almost got arthritis the first week I worked with it! I HATE special-function-keys and cutesy mouse functions. Just let me keep those fingers where they belong, and watch the letters fly! - Jerry Kaidor ( jkaidor@synoptics.com )
doug@eris.berkeley.edu (Doug Merritt) (05/03/91)
In article <1991Apr15.211355.7919@ukpoit.co.uk> alan@ukpoit.co.uk (Alan Barclay) writes: > >Fairly obviously the designers of vi wern't touch typists, for two >reasons: Bzzt! Thanks for playing. Wrong, Bill Joy *was* a touch typist at the time he designed vi. Quite a fast one, at that. He was also the soul designer; he studied up on emacs, the rand editor, etc, and requested lots of suggestions, but the resulting design was 100% his decision. >2) If you're a touch typist then 'u','d','l','r' seems as natural as >you can get.... This and all the other comments in this thread about what's natural/good/ reasonable for touch typing are spurious. There's no particular reason to think that there's any such criteria, let alone one that is well or poorly matched by vi's scheme. 1) The extent to which it's mnemonic has nothing to do with touch typing. Mnemonicity is also important only during the learning phase, and Bill Joy stated quite clearly in his documentation that vi caters only to experts. This sometimes unpopular sentiment is easily justified by many studies from CHI literature (basically that systems that cater purely to beginners always hinder experts, yet all beginners become experts fairly quickly). 2) The argument that the keys should be far apart or on different hands is irrelevent, since there's no reason to think that one is rapidly typing up->left->down->right etc. When cursor keys are used in quick succession, it is inevitably the *same* key that is repeated, so from that point of view it matters little which key it is. 3) A dvorak keyboard makes far more of a difference than any possible arrangement of editor command keys; editor commands are far less frequent overall than text entry. 4) VI already caters to touch typing (as do most editors) by 1) not requiring the fingers to leave the touch typing area of the keyboard (i.e. you don't *have* to lift your hand and move it to a stupid arrow keypad; function keys and other keypads are the ultimate evil for touch typists), and 2) you need not type CTRL along with the primary key to effect cursor control; this caters to touch typing because it's faster to hit one key than to coordinate two keystrokes. As someone else noted, it also allows one to browse with one hand while drinking coffee with the other, which is a not insignificant advantage. Doug -- -- Doug Merritt doug@eris.berkeley.edu (ucbvax!eris!doug) or uunet.uu.net!crossck!dougm
dik@cwi.nl (Dik T. Winter) (05/03/91)
In article <1991May2.193905.16971@agate.berkeley.edu> doug@eris.berkeley.edu (Doug Merritt) writes: > (i.e. you don't > *have* to lift your hand and move it to a stupid arrow keypad; function > keys and other keypads are the ultimate evil for touch typists) Right. Saw off all those stupid keypads; they only use space. I am entering this from a Mac Plus; luckily no function keys. Still there is that keypad. I do not think I ever used it (except in stupid systems like VM/CMS of course). -- dik t. winter, cwi, amsterdam, nederland dik@cwi.nl
defaria@hpcupt3.cup.hp.com (Andy DeFaria) (05/08/91)
>/ hpcupt3:comp.editors / doug@eris.berkeley.edu (Doug Merritt) / 12:39 pm May 2, 1991 / >4) VI already caters to touch typing (as do most editors) by 1) not requiring > the fingers to leave the touch typing area of the keyboard (i.e. you don't > *have* to lift your hand and move it to a stupid arrow keypad; function > keys and other keypads are the ultimate evil for touch typists), and Of course you have to lift you hand to find that damn esc key frequently!
dylan@ibmpcug.co.uk (Matthew Farwell) (05/13/91)
In article <46440001@hpcupt3.cup.hp.com> defaria@hpcupt3.cup.hp.com (Andy DeFaria) writes: >>/ hpcupt3:comp.editors / doug@eris.berkeley.edu (Doug Merritt) / 12:39 pm May 2, 1991 / > >>4) VI already caters to touch typing (as do most editors) by 1) not requiring >> the fingers to leave the touch typing area of the keyboard (i.e. you don't >> *have* to lift your hand and move it to a stupid arrow keypad; function >> keys and other keypads are the ultimate evil for touch typists), and > >Of course you have to lift you hand to find that damn esc key frequently! No you don't. Use ctrl-[. Its useful if you often use keyboards where 1) esc keep changing position between different keyboards 2) There is no escape. Dylan. -- Matthew J Farwell: dylan@ibmpcug.co.uk || ...!uunet!ukc!ibmpcug!dylan You can't kill me, I'm a genius!!!!
xiaoy@bullet.ecf.toronto.edu (XIAO Yan) (05/13/91)
In article <46440001@hpcupt3.cup.hp.com> defaria@hpcupt3.cup.hp.com (Andy DeFaria) writes: > ...deleted... >Of course you have to lift you hand to find that damn esc key frequently! I would not use the words 'have to' -- you do have an option than "find that d**n esc key". Once I used an old Mac as a terminal and there was no ESC key on it. Till then I realized that you could use ctrl-[ For some keyboards ESC is located in 'rural' area and ctrl-[ is often easier to complish for me as a 'ctrl-key' user. (Keyboards like SGI's machine, Toshiba laptops). Xiao
ekw@world.std.com (Elliott C Winslow) (05/14/91)
Thank you (both of you so far) for reminding me of this! I had
forgotten.
In fact, a thank you again to all of you who keep the tricks coming.
Vi has increased so much for me since reading this newsgroup.
---
Elliott Winslow IM {uunet,xylogic}!world.std.com!ekw
(718) 429-5793 {apple,pacbell,hplabs,ucbvax}!well!ekwdefaria@hpcupt3.cup.hp.com (Andy DeFaria) (05/16/91)
>/ hpcupt3:comp.editors / dylan@ibmpcug.co.uk (Matthew Farwell) / 11:46 am May 12, 1991 / >>Of course you have to lift you hand to find that damn esc key frequently! > >No you don't. Use ctrl-[. Its useful if you often use keyboards where >1) esc keep changing position between different keyboards >2) There is no escape. Actually I had found this out a little while ago and I'm still trying to teach my fingers to use this key sequence instead of reaching for the esc key.