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