As I just read that editor review again, I'd like to add my 2 cents:
Other editors had "macro recording" as a pro. The Vim entry says "custom vim script". Now this is not about "too hard to figure out". It uses vimscript indeed, but it can also handle macros of any complexity. Type q (without a colon), add a register for that macro (like "a"), enter a bunch of Vim commands, press q again and you can play the macro any time by @a and @@. So what?
(Just to clarify that.)
Ah, and Vim's GUI might not be
that impressive. But what do you need a toolbar or even a menubar for at all?
Most people here use Ctrl+S to save something, I guess. They won't use a toolbar for it. So why do they care if Vim's toolbar and menu are ugly and too short and whatever?
(Mine doesn't have both of them anyway.)
Its help system was another "con". Hell, what do you expect? Screenshots?
You can even use
:helpgrep. Not many other editors allow this.
Having been convinced by a lot of positive reviews (also on DC
), GVim is my default editor on Windows right now (to be honest, it has been for a couple of months now). Notepad++ (its "predecessor") is my "alternative" for some special purposes, but it is not registered with anything anymore. Vim could do everything in a better and/or more flexible way.
jm2c, as stated above.
And sorry for the bump.