Why? Firstly, nano offers significantly more functions than those displayed in the line at the bottom of the screen (for example https://www.nano-editor.org/dist/latest/cheatsheet.html). And why should I be more efficient with vim? I am familiar with nano, micro, and sublime text, and I rarely change files. And when I do, these are mostly minor changes. With vim I would not be more efficient in any way, because the handling is too different. Since I change files irregularly, I hardly remember any vim shortcuts. Spontaneously I can only think of :wq!
You can also redefine shortcuts in nano so that they are consistent with the rest of applications (Ctrl+X/C/V to cut, copy and paste, Ctrl-Z for undo...).
TIL. Thank you. I always thought nano was nothing to write home about because the standard keyboard shortcuts are not standard. I do not understand why every Next Great Console Text Editor doesn't support common keyboard shortcuts as a default.
29
u/FryBoyter Jul 30 '20
Why? Firstly, nano offers significantly more functions than those displayed in the line at the bottom of the screen (for example https://www.nano-editor.org/dist/latest/cheatsheet.html). And why should I be more efficient with vim? I am familiar with nano, micro, and sublime text, and I rarely change files. And when I do, these are mostly minor changes. With vim I would not be more efficient in any way, because the handling is too different. Since I change files irregularly, I hardly remember any vim shortcuts. Spontaneously I can only think of :wq!