On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 07:38:52PM EST, Chet Ramey wrote: > On 1/23/12 8:52 AM, Roger wrote: > > > A little more indepth examination, and I can see VIM's wait is > > approximately double of what the readline patch's wait time is. > > However, I think the shorter wait time is more functional as when > > typing a double char, it in no way takes as long as VIM's wait time > > unless you type the same char with your finger and then use a toe to > > type the second char. > > > > Matter of fact, I'm starting to find VIM's long wait time length > > a little annoying. ;-) > > > > Great job at guessing the wait time! > > Thanks. Half a second seemed right.
In Vim, I have set the timeout to 200 milliseconds rather than the default 1000 (one whole second). This amounts to a typing speed of c. 5 characters per second or 60 wpm, a reasonable goal for the average typist. CJ
