cm0002@piefed.world to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 17 hours agoExit Signlemmy.mlimagemessage-square56fedilinkarrow-up1718arrow-down19
arrow-up1709arrow-down1imageExit Signlemmy.mlcm0002@piefed.world to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 17 hours agomessage-square56fedilink
minus-squaredarklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up10·13 hours agoNo, it isn’t, x writes only when changes have been made, while w writes unconditionally.
minus-squarejosefo@leminal.spacelinkfedilinkarrow-up1·7 hours agoWhy would you want to write again if no changes were made? It’s some obtuse behavior
minus-squaredarklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·7 hours agoOne obvious use-case is to cause the file to get a new timestamp, which for example tools like make look at.
Also :x is the same as :wq
No, it isn’t, x writes only when changes have been made, while w writes unconditionally.
Why would you want to write again if no changes were made? It’s some obtuse behavior
One obvious use-case is to cause the file to get a new timestamp, which for example tools like make look at.
TIL. Ty!