Waffelson@lemmy.world to linuxmemes@lemmy.world · 11 months ago:wq!lemmy.worldimagemessage-square114fedilinkarrow-up1226arrow-down174
arrow-up1152arrow-down1image:wq!lemmy.worldWaffelson@lemmy.world to linuxmemes@lemmy.world · 11 months agomessage-square114fedilink
minus-squareGoku@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up7arrow-down1·11 months agoWhy do so many people prefer :wq over :x?
minus-squareEuroNutellaMan@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up12·11 months agoCause I don’t like to think about my x
minus-squarerwhitisissle@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up7arrow-down1·11 months agoBecause :wq to me means “Issue command write, followed by command quit.” “Issue command x” to me means nothing in the context of vim, and ctrl + x on most systems is reserved for cutting, so it just “feels” wrong.
minus-squarelars@lemmy.sdf.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up4·11 months ago:x was a gamechanger. And it doesn’t update the file’s modify date if you made no changes. Sometimes I just sit back and think about all that saved time and effort so much that I have actually lost time by switching from :wq.
minus-squareAVincentInSpace@pawb.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·11 months agosame reason I prefer :wq to ZZ. muscle memory.
Why do so many people prefer :wq over :x?
Cause I don’t like to think about my x
Because :wq to me means “Issue command write, followed by command quit.” “Issue command x” to me means nothing in the context of vim, and ctrl + x on most systems is reserved for cutting, so it just “feels” wrong.
:x
was a gamechanger. And it doesn’t update the file’s modify date if you made no changes.Sometimes I just sit back and think about all that saved time and effort so much that I have actually lost time by switching from
:wq
.why not?
same reason I prefer :wq to ZZ. muscle memory.
There is a other option?