Yes? I mean, other vimmers might feel differently, but I basically don’t use counts like that. Counting to move the cursor is too much effort, especially if you’re counting higher than 2-3. It’s not worth the time it takes.
ww is the same number of keystrokes as 2w. I might use the latter if I needed a single motion operator to repeat later with ., like c2w, but ww or even www would be easier most of the time. Past that, we’re getting to the 4-5 keystrokes where / is better, and you can probably do it in two to three keystrokes with f-something (;) as easily as www.
So rather than counting how many words to get from here to there to find the right number to enter before the w, I’m just looking at the there and hit f, plus whatever character I’m looking at getting to, or a less common one adjacent to it. If the cursor doesn’t quite get there, you can ; a few times. If you overshoot, use , to reverse.
Do you mean that for both doing “4w” and “wwww”?
Yes? I mean, other vimmers might feel differently, but I basically don’t use counts like that. Counting to move the cursor is too much effort, especially if you’re counting higher than 2-3. It’s not worth the time it takes.
wwis the same number of keystrokes as2w. I might use the latter if I needed a single motion operator to repeat later with., likec2w, butwwor evenwwwwould be easier most of the time. Past that, we’re getting to the 4-5 keystrokes where/is better, and you can probably do it in two to three keystrokes withf-something (;) as easily aswww.So rather than counting how many words to get from here to there to find the right number to enter before the
w, I’m just looking at the there and hitf, plus whatever character I’m looking at getting to, or a less common one adjacent to it. If the cursor doesn’t quite get there, you can;a few times. If you overshoot, use,to reverse.