Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gitpyr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!gitpyr!robert
From: robert@gitpyr.UUCP (Robert Viduya)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: h,j,k,l in vi
Message-ID: <183@gitpyr.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Mar-85 02:14:11 EST
Article-I.D.: gitpyr.183
Posted: Fri Mar  1 02:14:11 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Mar-85 05:40:38 EST
References: <8242@brl-tgr.ARPA> <726@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA> <338@psivax.UUCP>
Organization: Georgia Tech, Atlanta
Lines: 25

><
Posted from  friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
>
> 	But 'vi' *doesn't* force h,j,k,l cursor control on you.
> Every version of it that I have ever seen also supports the *real*
> arrow keys on terminals that have them.  Why not use them if you
> don't like the ADM3-a approach.

Why not?  Because a lot of terminals have cursor keys that conflict with
vi's keystroke commands.  Take for example one of the Televideo type term-
inals.  The cursor right key sends a ^L and the cursor down sends a ^V.
Vi uses a ^L as a 'redraw screen' command and a ^V as a 'quote next char'
command.  What does vi do in this case?  It preempts the action normally
attached to the keys in favor of the cursor keys, leaving the poor user
without a redraw screen or quote next.  Then there's the ADDS Regent 25
which uses a ^Z as one of it's cursor control keys.  Under 4.2BSD, vi isn't
built to catch that.

			robert
-- 
Robert Viduya
Georgia Institute of Technology

...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,masscomp,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!robert
...!{rlgvax,sb1,uf-cgrl,unmvax,ut-sally}!gatech!gitpyr!robert