On 29 September 2010 15:05, Erik de Castro Lopo <[email protected]> wrote: > Lex Trotman wrote: > >> Perhaps, as you say, it should offer a substitute command that works >> line by line as well, but "someone has to do it" (tm) and "patches are >> welcome" (tm) (that right Frank ;-). > > Thats a better answer than your previous one :-).
Oh, there is rarely any objection to contributions, that goes without saying. I was noting that the current behavior is not a bug (since it behaves as specified) so it doesn't have to be fixed. nor is a change in behavior necessary (since there is a workaround to the rare "problem") so it doesn't have to be fixed. With limited resources there are far more important things to think about. I personally don't care if someone changes it (although I think that going back to line by line operation is a step back into the time when whole files would not fit in memory, ah hey lets bring back Teco ;-). Cheers Lex > > Erik > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Erik de Castro Lopo > http://www.mega-nerd.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Geany mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany > _______________________________________________ Geany mailing list [email protected] http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany
