I don't have a paper I can cite you, however if you talk to vim users most will tell you they feel more efficient and less friction compared to "normal" way of editing code. There's a reason this program is so popular and there are vim keybindings for any popular editor, after all.

As a vim user, I am 100% convinced that I am not that much faster than my colleagues who use normal key binds. However, I subjectively feel a lot less friction editing with vim keys than I do with the mouse and arrow keys. So Vim makes me happier...

This is the way I look at it. The productivity claims are probably a bit overhyped. For me Vim is just simply fun! It makes me think of the best way to do something, and there is always something new to learn. It makes me happy as well :)

While your perspective is totally valid, I think the idea that you always have to think about and learn how to use your editor seems to confirm the original commenter's point about the whole thing being too complicated.

To which I say, I've been using Vim (and nVim) for more than 20 years now, and the learning part is optional after a year or so of intense use.

Same thing. Not sure why everyone is obsessed with the speed argument. Reducing cognitive load is the goal. How do you do that - with vim or something else like snippets or copilot or just muscle-memorying ctrl/shift-arrow motion is up to you.

Asking why people prefer vim is like asking why they prefer skateboard over rollers. You’re proficient at what you learned the most. The only thing you have to keep in mind is that every tool has its limits, so choose what you’re going learn from that perspective as well.

What source can he give you? It's clearly a personal annecdote that is shared between a lot of people that use vim. What kind of source are you thinking about?

I don't know, I'm not the one who made the claim that X was faster than Y.

Are you saying that studying how efficient various text editors are for some groups of people is not possible?

Here's what I believe to be an example of some study on how text editors compare:

https://mjambon.github.io/vim-vs-emacs/

Not saying that this is a good study - I haven't even read it. Merely providing it as an example that at some point a study has been made in this area.

I'm not saying that you can't do it, you obviously can. It's just weird asking for studies for something that was clearly a personal annecdote. It's like asking someone: "Which knife is your favorite knife?" getting an answer and asking for a study that validates the answer.

Sorry, English is not my first language so I guess I misinterpreted it. What I was replying to was:

> Assuming you've given time to learn it, editing with vim takes less mental effort and is faster.

What gave away that it was a personal anecdote? I interpreted the "you" part as if he was speaking generally about other people and not only himself

In my main language, we would have written something like below if it was a personal anecdote (rough direct translation):

> I was able to edit faster using Vim after taking the time to learn it.

You're talking about two totally different things.

GP is saying Vim users generally have muscle memory of their shortcuts (I might add, to the extent that some of them may not even be conscious which keys they are pressing). GP also mentioned that Vim takes less mental effort (due to muscle memory) and is faster.

The faster part is easy to argue even from a theory perspective. Your hands basically never leave the home position. The time saved from physically moving your hands to and from various keyboard/mouse positions are reduced. At least Vim can be faster in that sense.

You're saying you have a personal anecdote about a coworker (who from your description isn't necessarily using Vim). How is that relevant?

> How is that relevant?

I keep reading and hearing folk claiming that X is faster, as in this thread. It would be nice to read some actual study showing this to be true, but it seems like it mostly ends up being strongly held opinions based on anecdotes.

You say it's easy to argue. Sure, it's easy to argue but that doesn't make it correct. I could argue in the other direction and then we end up wasting our time.

It's true for me, and that's good enough for me.

Perhaps an objective, statistical significant study helps you decide, but ultimately, some people are more productive in Vim, and some people aren't. A study just gives you the average, but it doesn't necessarily imply anything for your personal experience with the tool.

Arguing what is "correct" here is a waste of time TBH. Nobody is really trying to prove anything. The person you originally replied to was trying to answer "Why so many people love vim?" . It's not because it is "objectively faster for everyone who uses it, provable in a reproducible large scale study", but rather because people perceive it making them work faster.

You don't have to accept the answer. Just leave it be.

> "It would be nice to read some actual study showing this to be true"

https://danluu.com/keyboard-v-mouse/ - concludes that it varies by situation; keyboard wins at tasks where you might expect keyboard to win, mouse wins at tasks where you might expect mouse to win, tools like regex search/replace wins at tasks where you might expect it to win.