Hacker News Reader

Comment by erikb | Hacker News Reader

Actually, why do so many people still use :wq? Vim has :x which does the same thing and saves a keystroke and saving keystrokes is what Vim is about, right?

View on HN

IIRC :wq always writes to and exits the file, thus updating the timestamp on it. :x (and ZZ) will only write to the file if there are new changes. So there is a difference between the two.

Personally, I just use :wq because muscle memory and that I sometimes find knowing the last time I even opened the file in an editor is a useful thing to know.

I didn't know about it until now. It might be because after a change I know I want to :w, but haven't yet decided if I also want to :q.

In such a situation I also do the :w and :q separately without even considering :x.

ZZ is way faster than either, especially on Dvorak.

What is the difference in Dvorak here? Is shift not used for upper case letters?

No, but w and q are on opposite sides of the keyboard.

Which should make wq faster?

You're forgetting the colon. You're already pressing shift.

Actually I meant that when touch typing, using both hands is quicker than one hand/typing the same character twice. But you're right ofcourse ; it's ":wq" vs "ZZ" - which means the latter is quicker. Not that I actually think it matters much, but that's neither here nor there - it's important to decide what colour the bikeshed should be ;)

I use :x all the time, and I haven't used :wq, at least in a while. Also, I remapped ctrl-s to :w, which is easier especially when control key is my capslock key. But I do get a kick of seeing the ":wq" joke/sticker, which is funny but only Vim users can understand.

    nmap <C-m> <ESC>:w!<CR>
    nmap <C-n> <ESC>:q<CR>
    nmap <C-l> <ESC>:q!<CR>

This is much better. Ctrl-M followed by N does a fast :wq

Actually, why do so many people still use :x? Vim has ZZ which does the same thing and saves a keystroke and saving keystrokes is what Vim is about, right?

I know it was more of a joke, but there are actual reasons not to use ZZ.

(1) The difference is small, but one could argue that shift-z shift-z are more like 3.5 clicks, while shift-dot x are certainly 3 clicks.

(2) People are used to do a colon before an actual interaction with the editor instead of the text.

(3) taste. Even if one argues that both has the same effort then taste is the final decision and there people can be different.

Regarding (1), ZZ is [hold shift][type zz][release shift], while :x is [hold shift][type :][release shift][type x], so I'd say :x is 1 more action than ZZ, and the timing of the release makes it slower IMO.

Is there a parallel to :w as ZZ is to :wq or :x? With my layout at least, typing double colons is a bit more annoying than regular letters.

did NOT know this, thanks a lot lol. (vim user for 5 years)

Muscle memory

Reply on news.ycombinator.com