So the first screen doesn't help in this situation
The sort of developers who get stuck in Vim are not the ones who are using it intentionally
So the first screen doesn't help in this situation
The sort of developers who get stuck in Vim are not the ones who are using it intentionally
>>> quit
Use quit() or Ctrl-D (i.e. EOF) to exit
The software knows perfectly well what I'm trying to do FFS. while True:
print(str(eval(input())))
Case in point: >>> x = str(quit)
>>> x
'Use quit() or Ctrl-Z plus Return to exit'
I suppose you could implement quit.__str__ as sys.exit(0), if you really wanted to avoid this problem.It does, it just does not care.
> it's basically just a hack around the fact that the repl is basically:
I know what a REPL is. Here's an idea: it's not difficult to add an exit special case to the REPL.
> Case in point:
Case in point: the developers added a "help text" to tell users to go fuck themselves, knowing exactly what users wanted to do and refusing to do it. quit's repr didn't appear by magic, it was put there, knowingly, by people who understood exactly what they were doing.
I don't program Python much but do its users constantly type "quit" but not actually want to quit such that the REPL special cases this situation?
That one would probably be somewhat risky actually, that message is the "repr" of the quit object/function, displaying results at the repl invokes repr… but so does printing most containers, so e.g. `vars(__builtins__)` (to get a quick list of the builtins) would also quit the repl, which would be undesirable.
The repl treats it specially because "quit", taken out of the context of the repl, makes sense as something to type in when trying to quit an unfamiliar program, not because actual Python programmers are likely to type it often.
They're different programs with different UI conventions. I don't expect them to act the same. And I especially don't expect vim to change, after having 25 years of its own precedent and an additional 16 through vi.
In both cases, this is because there's a race condition:
If you run a command and decide you want to kill it, you use ctrl-c. If the command finishes between you deciding to kill the command and the signal being sent, the "container" process (vim or python) receives the ctrl-c. If it always assumes "what you want" is to exit, you've maybe lost work - edits made or variables populated. Avoiding that is definitely the right call!
I think in this case vi's authors (and by extension vim's author) have picked the right choice of catering to the actual users, rather than being friendly to people who run the editor by mistake. At least they try to tell you "type :quit and press enter to exit".
Muscle memory can be a real pain some times.
Had switched from Ubuntu to Fedora and it turns out that vim was the default git editor not nano (until I switched it anyway).