What parent @waisbrot is saying seems uncommon (the source of this whole conversation), but granted, perhaps common enough (or is it instead worrisome enough) that nvim community took it out.
I still type :Q and :W as well, but that is not what is being discussed.
Have you ever irrevocably bricked your system, as @waisbrot mentioned they have twice, from typing :W or :Q? Have you ever bricked your system from typing :X? If so, that isn’t a “use :x vs :wq” problem, that’s seems more of a use common sense problem.
> I've twice encrypted my file with password like `cd tmp`, then saved the config file, breaking my system.
I get “irrevocably bricked system” from the fact that they “broke their system” and I am inferring it could only be something worth mentioning if it were irreversible.
I originally was trying to point out that parent was off-topic, because :x and :X are different. But a fleet of downvotes flooded in, so I defended my viewpoint for the catharsis.
Some people value stability and gvim. I don't consider nvim an upgrade, it's just a fork with different priorities which may or may not suit you. I continue to use vim and gvim.
Me either, but that's because I type `:wq!` every single time instead. I'm not one of those who is afraid of typing more than a single character so I don't care if it's actually 3 I'm hitting. I am someone whose entire brain comes to an absolute crash if I type "wq" and it's asking me if I want to save over a RO file. It's like having a belt loop or pocket catch on a door handle and I despise it.
So, `:wq!`, or as I call it "write the fucking file and quit, _with feeling_"