On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 01:44:56AM -0700, Chris Brannon wrote: > Karl Dahlke <[email protected]> writes: > > > g$ > > go to the last link on the line. > > Yep, it seems to follow the principle of least astonishment. I like it. > I frequently encounter pages with 12 links on a line, so this would be useful! > i$* belongs, if for no other reason than regularity of > the command set.
Agreed. > > > lsl file length > > How would these work? Would they just operate on the current file? > Another alternative would be to have a single lsf command that operates > kind of like a toggle. Initially, you just see filenames in the buffer, > like the situation today. But when lsf is invoked, the buffer is rebuilt > to display stat info alongside each filename. > Executing lsf again would hide the extra info. > This one isn't all that important to me either way. The lsf idea sounds sensible to me. > > Should I continue to use <func to run an edbrowse function, > > You should keep it. Yes, it's ugly, but it means that we never ever ever > have to worry about colliding with user functions when extending the > edbrowse command set. Sometimes there's a lot to be said for > conventions, even ugly ones. Agreed. Tbh I've never had an issue with that. What I would like though is some sort of variable support in edbrowse functions. It'd also be nice if the ok prompt could alter if a command being ran returns non-zero, and perhaps allow this to be checked in edbrowse functions. Cheers, Adam.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Edbrowse-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.the-brannons.com/mailman/listinfo/edbrowse-dev
