Hi Titus, On 3 September 2012 10:02, Titus von der Malsburg <[email protected]> wrote: > What :q and :wq should do in Evil is a matter of taste. I redefined > them (in init.el) to only close the buffer and leave the window > untouched. See below.
Thanks! These behave exactly as I prefer it! Guido > > Titus > > (evil-define-command evil-quit (&optional bang) > "Closes the current buffer." > :repeat nil > (interactive "<!>") > (when bang > (set-buffer-modified-p nil)) > (kill-this-buffer)) > > (evil-define-command evil-save-and-close (file &optional bang) > "Saves the current buffer and closes the window." > :repeat nil > (interactive "<f><!>") > (evil-write nil nil nil file bang) > (evil-quit bang)) > > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Guido Van Hoecke <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I usualy have a 2x2 window configuration for my Emacs frame. >> My evil-version is 0.1 and my emacs is >> GNU Emacs 24.2.1 (x86_64-apple-darwin, NS apple-appkit-1038.36) >> of 2012-08-27 on bob.porkrind.org >> >> Anybody has an idea why :q or :wq not only gets rid of the buffer, but >> also of the window? >> >> Editing a file in window 2 with following configuration >> >> -1- -2- >> -3- -4- >> >> and doing :q in -2- I end up with configuration >> >> ---1--- >> -3- -4- >> >> This is rather annoying. >> >> Any pointers? >> >> TIA, >> >> >> Guido >> >> -- >> No one knows like a woman how to say >> things that are at once gentle and deep. >> -- Hugo >> >> http://vanhoecke.org ... and go2 places! >> >> _______________________________________________ >> implementations-list mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/implementations-list > > > > -- > Titus von der Malsburg > DFG Research Group 868: Mind and Brain Dynamics > Dept. of Linguistics, University of Potsdam > http://www.ling.uni-potsdam.de/~malsburg/ _______________________________________________ implementations-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/implementations-list
