claude-code - 💡(How to fix) Fix imap jk <ESC> in the claude prompt [1 comments, 2 participants]

Official PRs (…)
ON THIS PAGE

Recommended Tools

×6

Utilities matched from this issue’s tags and category — try them while you read without losing context.

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Paste a GitHub issue URL. We fetch that issue, discover linked issues from bodies/comments/timeline, collect linked pull requests, and produce a structured English report.

The report is written in English Markdown for sharing and archival.

Helpful · Quick feedback

Loading…
GitHub stats
anthropics/claude-code#58651Fetched 2026-05-14 03:42:49
View on GitHub
Comments
1
Participants
2
Timeline
5
Reactions
0
Timeline (top)
labeled ×4commented ×1
RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

Preflight Checklist

  • I have searched existing requests and this feature hasn't been requested yet
  • This is a single feature request (not multiple features)

Problem Statement

Hello,

I am vim enthusiast and I use the vim mode in the claude prompt, which I really enjoy. In vim I have always used imap jk <ESC> to go into command mode faster. Could this be added to claude code? This issue was brought up before but was cancelled, would really love to see this happen. Thanks! Sergio

Proposed Solution

Add mapping of keys to vim mode.

Alternative Solutions

No response

Priority

Low - Nice to have

Feature Category

CLI commands and flags

Use Case Example

No response

Additional Context

No response

Vote matrix · Quick signals

Works
Did the solution work? Tap to confirm.
Easy Fix
Was it a quick fix?
Time Saver
Did it save you time?
Blocking
Was it severely blocking?
Common Issue
Are others likely hitting this too?
Flaky / Intermittent
Is it intermittent?
Verified / Reproducible
Can you reproduce it reliably?
Loading…

Still need to ship something?

×6

Another batch ranked right after the header list — different links, same matching logic.

Back to top recommendations

TRENDING

claude-code - 💡(How to fix) Fix imap jk <ESC> in the claude prompt [1 comments, 2 participants]