Yes, a slight misunderstanding, I only meant that the fact that K types in insert mode doesn't mean you move to Ctrl+N to replicate its functionality, you should still maintain the same position (K)
Sure, but [n]ext and [p]revious are common in the TUI world and which one makes more sense is debatable. There's decades of history behind the choice and while I prefer j/k I wouldn't call n/p wrong.
Yes, it's an very common mistake, there is also decades of history behind fixing it. But the debate here is not j/k vs [n]ew file/[p]rint file, but about the inconsistency of using one logic in navigating lines of text in an editor vs another in navigating lines of text in a file list
I'm pretty sure next and previous are older than new file and print file both of which have little use in this context. You could also see it as navigating lines of text vs navigating results in a list (ie search in less/vim) if you want to be pedantic. In (Neo)Vim <C-j> in insert mode inserts a new line below the current and <C-k> inserts digraphs. N/P are not necessarily inconsistent.
Indeed, creating a file is of little use in a file viewer, and is [p]age up old enough?
> if you want to be pedantic
I don't, the question is how you justify that in the search for consistency? I don't get the C-j, the issue with consistency is J/K, why do digraphs matter, are they more important than basic navigation?
> creating a file is of little use in a file viewer
I'm not sure the first programs could handle more than one, and (neo)vi(m) just uses :e, for edit. New or existing is irrelevant, it's not Microsoft Word.
> is [p]age up old enough
Is this a real thing? I only know of [f]orward/[b]ack and [d]own/[u]p.
> are they more important than basic navigation
Don't put words in my mouth, but sure in insert mode you're not supposed to navigate, but this discussion is getting off-topic.
