Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Canonical mode – map QWERTY to Colemak #5

Open
Abdillah opened this issue Dec 27, 2016 · 10 comments
Open

Canonical mode – map QWERTY to Colemak #5

Abdillah opened this issue Dec 27, 2016 · 10 comments

Comments

@Abdillah
Copy link

Abdillah commented Dec 27, 2016

I push my two cents here.

TLDR; A key mapping based on purely QWERTY to Colemak key placement position.
e.g. hjkl into hnei, qwerty into qwfpg, so insert mode i will be u

Vim tutorial already lots out there. And in Vim, keys are fundamental. This plugin actually works great. But, the plugin mapping actually makes more pain when learning new shortcut based on a tutorial. Additionally, when we switch to vim without plugin or computer without Colemak, the keys messed up (actually, it's my brain which does messed up).

It's great to see a colemak mapping which maps directly it's key placement from QWERTY origin into Colemak. Well, I call it canonical mode ;)

@jooize
Copy link
Owner

jooize commented Dec 30, 2016

I want this.

@Abdillah
Copy link
Author

Abdillah commented Jan 2, 2017

I think of simple plugin option, just like the one I tried here. Those are a simple one on one key remap (and no serious testing).

Do you think, it is possible to make a remap on runtime?
PS: My VimL knowledge isn't so good actually.

@LaserMoai
Copy link

LaserMoai commented Jul 12, 2017

Coleremak seems to fit the bill, but the colon remap at least is kind of weird.

@jamischarles
Copy link

I recently had use vim on a server and tried to see how easily I could use it by switching the keyboard to normal mode (non-colemak).

I love colemak and this plugin is great (have been using it for several years) but I couldn't help but feel that

  1. : is so much nicer placed for vim in normal layout
  2. using y for yank and p for paste seems more intuitive. It makes the keys make sense from a mnemonic perspective and not just muscle memory.

@LaserMoai
Copy link

Do you mean you like the vanilla Colemak placement? Index finger for hjkl seems nuts.

I've fixed the Tab key in Coleremak in my fork if anyone cares.

@jooize
Copy link
Owner

jooize commented Sep 18, 2017

  1. : is so much nicer placed for vim in normal layout
  2. using y for yank and p for paste seems more intuitive. It makes the keys make sense from a mnemonic perspective and not just muscle memory.

I have colon on Shift–., and I kind of agree about yank and paste, but where to place movements? Current approach is consistently different.

Use of remote stock Vim is awful with hjkl on QWERTY's hynu. I'll have to try Coleremak. Anything that doesn't work as expected with it?

@LaserMoai
Copy link

LaserMoai commented Sep 18, 2017

I haven't noticed anything wrong in my version yet.

EDIT: Ah, so @jamischarles was talking about the colon.

@jamischarles
Copy link

@GeneralFailer No, I use @jooize 's excellent movement mappings, with the exception that I swapped the u and y keys. It always felt off to me until I did that.

I tried swapping oO and ;: keys in normal mode but ran into lots of issues. I currently settled on having O mapped to : in normal mode because I rarely use O to insert, but I like the idea of using something like Shift-. as @jooize mentioned above, because I occasionally get confused. My brain expects the keys to be in the same place across modes for some reason haha.

@jooize jooize changed the title Canonical mode - mapping QWERTY to Colemak as it is Canonical mode – map QWERTY to Colemak Oct 23, 2017
@LaserMoai
Copy link

I'm pretty sure Coleremak also breaks functionality of emmet-vim, so it probably needs to be rewritten. Oh well...

@LaserMoai
Copy link

Heads up, I don't really care to fix Coleremak, so I'm leaving it unmaintained.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants