I have several cpp source files in tabs in vim. I would like to have another tab with command prompt in order to run make. I open net tab , run sh and now I have console. But how to move from this console to other tabs? If I press ctrl+page up I have garbage in console and no tab change. How to move to another text tab when staying in console tab?
As I said, vim 8 or neovim both have an terminal emulator in it.
Since you are using vim 7 here are some other ways:
Tmux as #wizzup mentioned is perfect for this use-case. I think it is the most used Terminal-Multiplexer and extremly mighty. It is complex in comparison but since you are using vim, a steep learning curve should not be a killer point. However there are a few cavehats but you will find thousands of articles to solve them.
GNU Screen is an alternative to tmux, I have no experience with it, but should be usable pretty good with vim too.
With them you can use something like this Plugin which allows you to use the terminal in vim itself. However I haven't tested it but it seems to be rather groomed.
When working in GUI we do alt-tab (or cmd-tab in mac) to switch between multiple programs, for example I am writing a text file in a text editor and then I do alt-tab to switch to already running browser to google up something then I alt-tab again to come back to keep editing.
How do you perform such "switch between" programs in command line interface - for example working with a ssh command line shell?
EDIT: I forgot to mention it, I am using ssh to connect to my university's server, and they don't have screen & tmux installed, and my account have no right to install any new apps... Is there any built-in functionality to perform this task, or any work around? For exmaple can I "minimize" running proggram and come back to regular shell interface, do some work, then display the "minimized" process again?
Another workaround: use the shell's job control, eg if you're editing a file, CTRL-z pauses the editor and brings you back to the shell, where you can compile, see manpages, browse the web or whatever -- and of course you can background the browser or anything else.
Screen command offers the ability to detach a long running process (or program, or shell-script) from a session and then attach it back at a later time.
As a crude workaround, run multiple terminal windows on your computer, and alt-tab between them.
Incidentally, at the Linux console, you can switch virtual terminals with ctrl+alt+F for at least F1 through F6, commonly F8 or more (depends on how the distro sets them up). Not your case, I know, but in case future visitors should benefit.
If you are comfortable in Emacs, it allows you to run multiple independent ansi-term buffers.
You can also use "GNU screen" to emulate multiple terminals in one terminal.
Is it possible to have a new instance on vim in every tab?
Because I want to have seperate buffers in each tab.
So I could run one tab for the controllers I'm editing, one for all my views etc.
As seen in comments I don't see why you should have different instances of vim, anyway you could try GNU screen or tmux to launch different vim sessions and switch beetween them.
No, the tabs are already inside Vim and you obviously can't run Vim inside itself.
The only way for you to really have separate instances in MacVim is to use two different GUI windows.
It sounds like you are having troubles keeping track of your buffers, don't you?
Is there a way I can configure vim to remember buffers based on their tab?
I am currently working on two projects, and I have each project in its own tab, with its own local directory. To navigate through files I'm using FuzzyFinder.
The problem is that when I want to search through buffers, I get all the buffers from both projects.
Can I limit it to show only buffers from the current tab?
It may very well be that I am using a wrong approach here. If this is the case, what would be a better one?
Vim's tabs are not like most other editors tabs: they don't represent specific files or groups of files. They are just "views" allowing you to arrange buffers visually.
Vim's buffers are global and AFAIK there is no native way to bind them to specific tabs but I saw a "per-tab" fork of NERDTreee on Github the other day so it might be possible with some effort.
I use tabs only for quick edits and have usually one or two dozens buffers open. Most of them are hidden (:help hidden) and I rarely have more than 3 splits (only one file visible, most of the time). Buffer switching and file opening are done with LustyExplorer.
If I must work on two project I use two instances of GVim or two separate "GUI" windows in MacVim.
So yes, your approach is wrong (mine is most probably not perfect, either) but the culprit is the person or commity which decided to call Vim's tabs "tabs".
As a side note I find the "Rolodex Vim" idea quite enjoyable, there are two implementations on this page.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
Background
I'm building an application where it detects what documents you're using from the file system. To do this it must access the AXDocument attribute of the active window. MacVim provides this. Running Vim in the Terminal wouldn't provide this.
I've just put out a survey to ask what editor coders who are interested in my app use. A significant number of the folk using Vim used it directly from the command line.
Why not use a GUI Vim?
Why do some people prefer to run Vim this way versus a GUI implementation like MacVim?
What advantages does this offer? As I understand it, you can send files to MacVim from the command line just as easily as command line Vim.
These reasons may be different for each specific developer but my guess would be:
vim is pretty much vim on any platform. GUI implementations can
vary.
Familiarity - being familiar with vim does not nessecarily mean
being familar with vim wrapped ina
GUI - espectially given #1.
"Elite Complex" ;-)
No definite avantages to the users over cli vim.
One might not have access to a gui (think ssh) or simply force of habit.
Although I don't use any feature exclusive to the GUI version (never touch the mouse while editing) I find GVIM more pleasing to the eye for fonts rendering and color management. So the only reason to use the cli version is not having access to a graphic environment (like when accessing a remote machine via ssh). Using GVIM also allows reuse of the terminal it was called from without having to use screen.
being able to run vim under screen provides
reliability: it will stay alive if X or the terminal app crashes. not sure how applicable this is to the Mac.
the option to multiplex sessions within terminal tabs. I actually end up rarely using terminal tabs because of this. It's possible (albeit a bit confusing) to set up heirarchical screen sessions and move branches of them around. screen is super awesome. This also provides an additional layer of text buffering in which you can search by regexp — this is useful if you spawn a shell command that is pages long and you're looking for a particular word in there.
the ability to connect to an existing session from another computer or reconnect after a network outage
and friends
in addition to making it possible to use screen, the console vim provides better shell integration. Although it's possible to run shell commands from within gvim (again, I'm not sure how this applies to the Mac, I'm a linux guy), there are limitations. I rarely use a gui vim so I'm not sure about the exact limits. For example, ANSI color codes are removed. I find this annoying because I tend to interact with SCM that way, for example running :!git diff --cached to check the changes in the index before committing. It makes for a somewhat quicker and more satisfying (mmm, diffy!) read if it's colourized.
I used to feel that gvim was a big improvement for viewing diffs, but I've changed the background colour of my terminal to a dark non-black shade, and set
:highlight DiffAdd ctermbg=Black
:highlight DiffChange ctermbg=Black
:highlight DiffDelete ctermbg=Black
:highlight DiffText cterm=Bold ctermbg=None
The result of this is that in diff mode, differing text shows up with a black background, and unchanged text is coloured with the terminal background colour. For side-by-side diffs, this works wonderfully, since you can tell immediately based on the other side whether a given line is a change or add; for non-side-by-side you will be able to see an unchanged part in a changed line.
This means that you can leave syntax colouring on and still be able to see diffs. Again, you do need to be able to set the background colour of the terminal to a unique, dark, non-black shade. This facility is available in the terminal emulators that I use (yakuake/konsole and roxterm) and many others.^[?Mac^M"mya)^O^Op
This also assumes that you're using a colourscheme meant for use with a dark background colour; I use a modified delek.
Although I haven't tried this, there is also the option to run console vim in 256-colour mode on terminals which support that mode — which I believe includes most or all modern ones. This can serve to make much of the subtlety of GUI colorschemes available to console vim.^["mp
I also like it that it lives in the place where it was started, and starts up quick. So if I'm navigating around in the shell, as per my wont, I can edit a file without interrupting that flow or having to farm that operation out to a different piece of conceptual real estate. Having less things to keep track of is a big plus. Being able to background it is helpful, too, for example if I need to grab the contents of an unexported shell variable via xclip. If I'd spawned a GUI window instead I might have some trouble remembering where that shell was, or might have already closed it.
My main reason for using a gui vim at all is that it makes somewhat more sense as something spawned from a gui app, eg a browser. In practice I never do this, and I suspect that it's fairly equivalent to just have a new terminal window pop up with a new console vim in it. Though there is likely some (window manager) window management functionality that is exclusive to gui implementations. This is pretty similar to the use case you're discussing.
gvim is actually just a basic terminal emulator with vim running in it, and some menus and toolbar buttons up the top.
So if you have a good, full-featured terminal emulator already, you may as well use that instead, since you'll be using the same type of terminal window that you are familiar with across all your terminal sessions.
Another benefit is that it makes it easy to switch to a shell inside vim and then switch out seamlessly.
On Windows I prefer gvim. On Linux it's vim inside gnome-terminal, which is nice and configurable thankyou.
To avoid (or at least minimize) the use of the mouse.
some gvim variations can't handle
some of my hotkeys
some spawn separate window when i try
to compile program
sometimes they simply can't use fonts
like fixed or terminus correctly
(think about "terminus bold" - some
gvim variations simply stretch
"terminus normal" instead of
rendering with the separate font)
cli generally works faster than gui,
especially if running in real
textmode console (not possible on a
mac though)
there are almost no benefits in using
GUI version, and i'd loose ability to
run in screen, ssh, to suspend
process with ctrl+z, and many more.
The main reason I use the command line is that I spend most of my day in a terminal already, and my use of vim reflects this. I do not open up vim for a long while just editing different files then opening others without closing it; I usually open a file or two do a few edits then do some command line tasks, maybe change a directory, and open up vim somewhere else. When using the a gui there is substantial lag when opening the editor. This wouldn't bother me if I opened it once and left it open but I tend to not work that way. So the command line works better for my workflow. Furthermore since there is no real benefit feature-wise of the GUI over the command line and vise-versa, I've always just stuck with the command line since it suited me better.
vim is way more performant with huge files (100-500MB .csv or .xml files in my case).
gvim beats vim hands-down when used to compare files (gvimdiff): setting the font (want more content on the screen?), dragging the window split line (want to see more of one file rather than the other) etc.
Other than that, I haven't seen other mayor differences and use gvim except when working with large files because I find it more handy in a graphical environment (gnome).
Speed of rendering
proper shell integration with
suspend (C-z),
alternate terminal,
uniform copy/paste
nicer quickfix integration (all external programs run inside your terminal, instead of popup windows... )
network agnostic: can run over ssh
using GNU screen, can detach/attach session over internet;
To the sometimes mentioned 'downside':
mouse support is up to par with :se mouse +=a; this enables selection, window border dragging with the mouse, even over GNU screen over ssh
Pair coding via vim + gnu screen is the selling point for me. I work in screen/vim all day, it allows people to remote into my screen session and we can both edit files fluidly. It's so hot right now.
As a big vim user myself, although I know about GUI vims, I don't use them just out of habit.
I've been using vi since 1990, switched to vim a few years ago but still call it through an alias (alias vi=vim).
For me its just habit. vim works well as it is. Perhaps the gui offers more and I should explore it, but vim works just the way I expect it to and want it to.