1 points | by video_2 a day ago ago
6 comments
Or, just learn / use awk, since you'll need it anyway.
awk is nice in a lot of cases, especially for tabular data, but it's hard to deny vim's capabilities for handling plain text using text objects. For instance, you can't really tell awk to just "extract this entire sentence" like you can with vim.
You realize Vim will detect "sentence" based on exactly the same regex you can feed to awk? And "tabular data", dear me...
Yes, but vicut is also faster on benchmarks. And you won't need to write out a whole regex.
Also, I'd love to see what this "sentence finding" regex of yours would look like. I'm sure it's way better than just typing "vis"
> Yes, but vicut is also faster on benchmarks
Than awk? I very, very doubt your 0.001-3s findings.
> I'm sure it's way better than just typing "vis"
Of course. Because you can use it everywhere, that's the whole point of learning regex, awk, or any other POSIX tool.
This looks really cool and I look forward to playing with it down the road.
Or, just learn / use awk, since you'll need it anyway.
awk is nice in a lot of cases, especially for tabular data, but it's hard to deny vim's capabilities for handling plain text using text objects. For instance, you can't really tell awk to just "extract this entire sentence" like you can with vim.
You realize Vim will detect "sentence" based on exactly the same regex you can feed to awk? And "tabular data", dear me...
Yes, but vicut is also faster on benchmarks. And you won't need to write out a whole regex.
Also, I'd love to see what this "sentence finding" regex of yours would look like. I'm sure it's way better than just typing "vis"
> Yes, but vicut is also faster on benchmarks
Than awk? I very, very doubt your 0.001-3s findings.
> I'm sure it's way better than just typing "vis"
Of course. Because you can use it everywhere, that's the whole point of learning regex, awk, or any other POSIX tool.
This looks really cool and I look forward to playing with it down the road.