> I have no idea what the "much more" refers to.
all the things i can do with vim are very useful while reading a man
page.
* a file is mentionned ? use gf to jump in it
* a command is provided? edit it so it fit your system and run it with
!!
* want to add something to your notes? ranges to the rescue:
.,'aw >> ~/notes
* and so on ...
actually the more i know vim, the less i use the shell because i never
had to copy/paste anymore.
an example: to understand the tagging functionality,
i wanted to read the man page from my clone of the openbsd repo.
i have a command L defined like this:
command -range L <line1>,<line2>!xargs locate
so i typed this on a line
*openbsd*less.1
then i use command :L to get
/home/mc/src/vendor/openbsd/usr.bin/less/less.1
so i typed !!xargs man<cr>
and i get the content.
this is the kind of shortcuts i use all the time.
> The main effect is to lose tagging functionality.
> default pager, you cannot use the :t functionality to move to the
> place where a word is defined.
vim has a very good support of file navigation using ctags. however
i don't know what to ctag on and what should be the usage from man.
is this the ability to navigate into the manpages?
> Yikes. I had no idea what either of these are doing and had to
> try them out. vi(1) contains so much bloat that is never really
> needed and doesn't belong in a text editor at all.
i really consider vim as a multipurpose interactive tui, not an editor.
i understand your concern about bloated softwares but i come from a
world where colleagues are editing java and python code using ms code
(editor based on an html render) to create web applications. so vim
is not that bloated.
also: reading/writing from/to pipes/buffer gave me a lot of power and
spare me the time to find, test and learn new tools to achieve the same.
i have only one multipurpose tui i learned and tuned since the last millenium
that helps me to edit mails (with spelling), code (with quickfix mode
and so on) and some macros i wrote 20 years ago still serves me today.
> > feature in openbsd vi. the linux version
> >
> > map K yw:E /tmp/vi.keyword.$$p!!xargs man
>
> You don't say what that is supposed to do.
sorry.
map K yw:E /tmp/vi.keyword.$$p!!xargs man
should be read:
map K # whenever i press K in normal mode
yw # yank the word
:E /tmp/vi.keyword.$$ # edit /tmp/vi.keyword.$$ in a new window
p # put the word you just pasted in the buffer
!!xargs man # filter the current line with xargs man
as a result: if the cursor is on the r of the word rctrl and i press
K, the manual appears in a new window
> Under Debian Jessie, if i start "vim", then type
> :map K yw:E /tmp/vi.keyword.$$p!!xargs man <ENTER>
> als <ESC>
> K <ENTER>
> E132: Function call depth is higher than 'maxfuncdepth'
> Press ENTER or type command to continue
you can call a map from a map and it seems something like this happens
in your case. vim mappings can avoid recursions: use noremap instead of
map.
however: K is built-in in vim and is much more powerful than my poor
macro:
* it relies on the 'isk' variable so you can set which chars can be a
part of a command
* it relies on 'kp' so you can choose an alternative to man to open
the doc (perldoc is useful when editing perl code)
* the cursor don't need to be on the very first char of the command:
anywhere on the command is fine.
> I also tried the same with OpenBSD vi(1) and it resulted in
>
> Usage: e[dit][!] [+cmd] [file].
>
> So, no idea what you are trying to do.
you have to be on the first letter of the command so instead of
als <ESC>
K <ENTER>
try
als <ESC>
b
K <ENTER>
> In 2014, i already wrote a patch to do that because the question
> came up repeatedly. But demand wasn't that high after all, so i
> never committed it. Now, i updated the patch to -current, see
> below.
i'll try to read this code as soon as possible.
> On the one hand, the UNIX phlosophy is to have each tool do one
> thing well, then use pipes to connect tools as needed.
> arguably, you maybe shouldn't need another tool to just revert
> something that the first tool does.
> Why would *not* adding backspace
> formatting require a pipe to another program, rather than not adding
> it in the first place?
can't reply on that: out of my skillset :)
anyway: thank you very much for taking time help me.
regards
marc
