Tangentially related, I wish more websites and blogs looked like this now. It's elegant and modern but simple.
himata4113•Jun 23, 2026
Lacks centering, other than that I also found it enjoyable to look at.
deadbabe•Jun 23, 2026
That’s a feature. It lets your thumb scroll comfortably in a larger blank area so the content is always in view for you. There is no reason for things to be centered, it does not aid readability.
himata4113•Jun 23, 2026
Not a feature on a 32inch ultrawide.
deadbabe•Jun 23, 2026
Use smaller window
zamadatix•Jun 23, 2026
Use phone horizontally.
Much more practically, the best designs are the ones who don't demand of the user they be consumed in a single form across every scenario.
lunar_rover•Jun 23, 2026
This only works on large enough tablets. On phones the page isn't readable without a 3x zoom.
christophilus•Jun 23, 2026
To me, the justified text makes it an effortful read.
Gualdrapo•Jun 23, 2026
Yup, I hope every one agrees to leave proper justified text to LaTeX/ConTeXt/Typst/<your_favorite_typesetting_software>, doing such thing for HTML is still ugly and makes things harder to read
nosioptar•Jun 23, 2026
Breaks Firefox's reader mode.
Looks like dog shit on mobile.
I agree that this general style is good, just without some of this page's fuckups.
kps•Jun 23, 2026
Chrome's too, but why? It's just plain HTML.
chorizo•Jun 23, 2026
Safari reader mode on mobile works great. But then again, this is a site where you should not need it.
heftig•Jun 23, 2026
Mobile browsers are assuming you're looking at a legacy page optimized for desktops (widescreen) and have a relatively large virtual screen size by default. They expect you to manually zoom in as necessary. Adding this helps:
This matches the max-width specified by the CSS. However, a smaller viewport width might be appropriate to increase the text size on mobile.
voidUpdate•Jun 23, 2026
I wish it took up more than 640 pixels on the left of my 1920 pixel screen. I changed the CSS of the body to be 900pt instead of 480, and it renders at 1200px wide, which looks a lot nicer to my eyes. Didn't bother trying to center it though, which would have improved it even more
fragmede•Jun 23, 2026
:x is a vim feature, so this wouldn't support it, so you'll have to use :wq instead.
atsaloli•Jun 23, 2026
or ZZ to save and exit
herodoturtle•Jun 23, 2026
28 years of vi and TIL about ZZ.
Thanks friend! ^_^
mghackerlady•Jun 23, 2026
I just learnt it the other day, as well. Granted, it was from chapter 1 of "Learning the vi and vim Text Editors" but shhh
bbaron63•Jun 23, 2026
ZZ is the first vi command I learned. After typing vi and only seeing a column of ~s, I asked how do I get out of this thing. Someone answered - ZZ.
wyclif•Jun 23, 2026
Did they say "zz" or specify [capital] "ZZ"?
alkyon•Jun 23, 2026
Repeat ZZ to save & exit if there are more files to edit
ZQ - discard & exit
JdeBP•Jun 23, 2026
Incorrect.
:x is a vi feature, that was introduced by Mary Ann Horton to actual Joy+Horton vi in February 1980.
Is still around, at least for some values of "around".
Elvis, at its latest release (2.2.0) is a required part of Slackware, part of the A (essential system) package series. I have it installed on my system, alongside Plasma 6.7 and kernel 7.1.
JdeBP•Jun 23, 2026
I was just talking about a fun and largely forgotten feature of Joy+Horton vi elsewhere.
You can see it here in Ritter vi on lines 83 et seq. of ex_vis.h . vi actually has three flavours of its 'open' mode, for cursor addressable video terminals, non-cursor addressable video terminals, and actual paper terminals.
There's an as-yet unfilled niche for the retrocomputeristas with genuine ADM-3s or (as someone pointed out) TI Silent 703s and suchlike to do a YouTube video showing Joy+Horton vi in its 3 open modes.
Joker_vD•Jun 23, 2026
What is open mode?
mikejulietbravo•Jun 23, 2026
text editors 5ever
imglorp•Jun 23, 2026
As an undergrad around 1984 I stumbled on some AT&T 3B2's in the computer lab and started to play. Knowing nothing of Unix (would have been ~ SVR3.x), I asked for help and the TA said something like "read the fine manual" as was customary. So I started off with "man something" and off we went, ending up at "man 1 vi", the glorious, pure original, none of this vim stuff...
Of course when I got onto the BSD VAX, someone set me straight and it was Emacs from there on..
whartung•Jun 23, 2026
I learned vi back in the day and have never really graduated to vim.
My favorite features are the ranges on the commands (like substitute or delete), piping the buffer into the bottomless utility of the classic UNIX command line, and the . do again command.
About the only vim feature I use today is being able to navigate while entering text, but even after all this time, that is not automatic to me.
I have used syntax coloring a couple of times, I find it particularly useful for XML, especially XML with chunks of XML commented out.
sawyers•Jun 23, 2026
Any interesting reading on the second paragraph?
Fwirt•Jun 23, 2026
I started writing a more fleshed out vi compatibility mode for TextAdept earlier this year. As someone who understood the basics after going through :vimtutor multiple times but always struggled with the more "advanced" commands, there's no better way to actually grok vi than to just try to recreate it. It's pretty amazing how much Bill Joy managed to pack in. Of course, if you're implementing POSIX vi, there are quite a few features that have aged poorly, like roff/troff macros and line-editing, but there are also quite a few commands that I had never paid attention to (like _) that have subtle behaviors that sped up my editing even more. The hardest part about becoming proficient in vi is committing commands to muscle memory so you don't habitually fall back on hjkl.
rav•Jun 23, 2026
> Of course, if you're implementing POSIX vi, there are quite a few features that have aged poorly, like roff/troff macros and line-editing
What do you mean by "roff/troff macros"?
EDIT: Ah, you're probably talking about the "section-wise" movements, defined in POSIX with language like "A line whose first character is a <period> and whose second and third characters match a two-character pair in the 'sections' edit option (see ex)" - that's the first time I've stumbled upon the 'sections' and 'paragraphs' options in the Vim manual ... Very quaint!
11 Comments
Much more practically, the best designs are the ones who don't demand of the user they be consumed in a single form across every scenario.
Looks like dog shit on mobile.
I agree that this general style is good, just without some of this page's fuckups.
Thanks friend! ^_^
ZQ - discard & exit
:x is a vi feature, that was introduced by Mary Ann Horton to actual Joy+Horton vi in February 1980.
* https://code.illumos.org/plugins/gitiles/illumos-gate/+/refs...
Ritter's vi is derived from Joy+Horton vi. Illumos has the original.
https://github.com/n-t-roff/heirloom-ex-vi/
"Gunnar Ritter <gunnarr@acm.org> 2007-11-29"
Just give me basic vi, or a complete editor
* https://jdebp.uk/FGA/vi-family.html#elvis (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48132452)
Elvis, at its latest release (2.2.0) is a required part of Slackware, part of the A (essential system) package series. I have it installed on my system, alongside Plasma 6.7 and kernel 7.1.
* https://mastodonapp.uk/@JdeBP/116793159030149624
You can see it here in Ritter vi on lines 83 et seq. of ex_vis.h . vi actually has three flavours of its 'open' mode, for cursor addressable video terminals, non-cursor addressable video terminals, and actual paper terminals.
There's an as-yet unfilled niche for the retrocomputeristas with genuine ADM-3s or (as someone pointed out) TI Silent 703s and suchlike to do a YouTube video showing Joy+Horton vi in its 3 open modes.
Of course when I got onto the BSD VAX, someone set me straight and it was Emacs from there on..
My favorite features are the ranges on the commands (like substitute or delete), piping the buffer into the bottomless utility of the classic UNIX command line, and the . do again command.
About the only vim feature I use today is being able to navigate while entering text, but even after all this time, that is not automatic to me.
I have used syntax coloring a couple of times, I find it particularly useful for XML, especially XML with chunks of XML commented out.
What do you mean by "roff/troff macros"?
EDIT: Ah, you're probably talking about the "section-wise" movements, defined in POSIX with language like "A line whose first character is a <period> and whose second and third characters match a two-character pair in the 'sections' edit option (see ex)" - that's the first time I've stumbled upon the 'sections' and 'paragraphs' options in the Vim manual ... Very quaint!