Editing Ideology

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 12: Line 12:
 
=== Vifm or ranger ===
 
=== Vifm or ranger ===
  
Vifm and [https://ranger.github.io/ ranger] follow different ideas in how to
+
For some reason people tend to try to compare Vifm and ranger, which is
implement file management, vi-like behaviour, and user interface in general.
+
incorrect. Comparing two applications that follow different ideas won't lead
 
+
to any results. Most significant common things:
What they have in common:
 
  
 
* They both are file managers.
 
* They both are file managers.
 
* They both claim to have vi-like key bindings.
 
* They both claim to have vi-like key bindings.
  
Vifm does have ''Vi'' in its name for a reason and while ranger is a
+
Although it might seem to be sufficient to start comparing them, it's not.  And
vi-like application, being such is not its main goal.  Contrary to ranger, Vifm
+
the reason why you can't compare them is that these two applications go
tries to be not just a "vi-like file manager", but rather "vim among file
+
different paths to implement both file managing and vi-like behaviour.
 +
 
 +
Vifm does have ''Vi'' in its name for a reason and while ranger can be called
 +
vi-like application, being such is not its main goal.  Contrary to ranger Vifm
 +
tries to be not just "vi-like file manager", but rather "vim among file
 
managers".
 
managers".
  
It's difficult to compare ranger and Vifm, but here's an incomplete attempt:
+
One can't really compare them in detail because they are so much different in
 +
general.  Even if one tries, it's easy to see how much they differ (the
 +
comparison is far from being complete as stated above, it's just to demonstrate
 +
the point):
  
 
{| class="wikitable"
 
{| class="wikitable"
Line 50: Line 56:
 
|}
 
|}
  
Vifm has some features that are absent in ranger and vice versa,
+
ranger has some features that are absent in vifm and vice versa,
those are not listed if they are not very much related regarding how
+
those are not listed if they are not very related to how much
vi-like an application is.
+
applications are Vim-like.
 +
 
 +
'''Note''' that this is not a try to say something bad about ranger, not at
 +
all.  If something is wrong, it must be corrected; missing information can be
 +
added.  The idea of this subsection is to show that Vifm and ranger should
 +
not be directly compared, each of them go different ways in both file managing
 +
and interacting with user.
  
The bottom line is that Vifm aims to give Vim-addicted users a similar
+
The bottom line is that Vifm aims to give Vim-addicted users similar
 
application for managing files and ranger is a nice file manager with vi-like
 
application for managing files and ranger is a nice file manager with vi-like
features. These are different applications with different goals that do not
+
stuff. These are different applications with different goals that do not
 
compete with each other.
 
compete with each other.
  

Please note that all contributions to Vifm Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Vifm:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To edit this page, please answer the question that appears below (more info):

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)