Re: :s/pattern Undocumented feature?

2006-09-22 Thread Bram Moolenaar
Bill McCarthy wrote: On Wed 20-Sep-06 1:08pm -0600, Tim Chase wrote: I hadn't seen a reply to this fly by, so I thought I'd let you know it wasn't entirely ignored :) It appears that :s/pattern produces the same result as :s/pattern//. I couldn't find that behavior in the docs.

Re: S

2006-09-22 Thread Yakov Lerner
On 9/22/06, Eric Leenman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I have a file where I deleted all lines that don't contain a certain pattern For example I want to delete all lines that don't contain XXX and YYY. Before: [start of file] abcde XXX fghij YYY 12345 AAA 67890 BBB klmno XXX pqrst YYY 09876

Re: :s/pattern Undocumented feature?

2006-09-22 Thread Tim Chase
I scoured through the help, looking in a multitude of places I deemed sensible, and couldn't find anything documented either. Thanks, Tim, for confirming this feature. Bram, could you please add a note to the help for ':s' that documents this feature? I thought this was explained somewhere,

Re: :s/pattern Undocumented feature?

2006-09-20 Thread Tim Chase
I hadn't seen a reply to this fly by, so I thought I'd let you know it wasn't entirely ignored :) It appears that :s/pattern produces the same result as :s/pattern//. I couldn't find that behavior in the docs. A hidden feature? (Or was I just not creative enough using helpgrep?) I'm not

Re: :s/pattern Undocumented feature?

2006-09-20 Thread Bill McCarthy
On Wed 20-Sep-06 1:08pm -0600, Tim Chase wrote: I hadn't seen a reply to this fly by, so I thought I'd let you know it wasn't entirely ignored :) It appears that :s/pattern produces the same result as :s/pattern//. I couldn't find that behavior in the docs. A hidden feature? (Or was I

Re: :s/pattern Undocumented feature?

2006-09-20 Thread Hari Krishna Dara
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 at 1:08pm, Tim Chase wrote: I hadn't seen a reply to this fly by, so I thought I'd let you know it wasn't entirely ignored :) It appears that :s/pattern produces the same result as :s/pattern//. I couldn't find that behavior in the docs. A hidden feature? (Or was

Re: s?

2006-07-14 Thread A.J.Mechelynck
Wim R. Crols wrote: Hi, Not really a request for help, but I was wondering if you guys ever use the 's' command. It's just a shortcut for 'cl', which I almost never need. Since I don't assume it was put in to be complete or something, I'm intrigued by it's enigmatic purpose. :) Thanks, Wim

Re: s?

2006-07-03 Thread Wim R. Crols
Thanks for all the explanations everyone. I do see your points, and will try to add 's' to my weaponry :) Wim On 6/30/06, Wim R. Crols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Not really a request for help, but I was wondering if you guys ever use the 's' command. It's just a shortcut for 'cl', which

Re: s?

2006-06-30 Thread Tim Chase
Not really a request for help, but I was wondering if you guys ever use the 's' command. It's just a shortcut for 'cl', which I almost never need. Since I don't assume it was put in to be complete or something, I'm intrigued by it's enigmatic purpose. :) I'll admit that it took me a while

Re: s?

2006-06-30 Thread Peter Slizik
Not really a request for help, but I was wondering if you guys ever use the 's' command. It's just a shortcut for 'cl', which I almost never need. Since I don't assume it was put in to be complete or something, I'm intrigued by it's enigmatic purpose. :) Well, I use it when I want to

Re: s?

2006-06-30 Thread Michael Naumann
On Friday 30 June 2006 15:16, Wim R. Crols wrote: Peter Slizik wrote: Not really a request for help, but I was wondering if you guys ever use the 's' command. It's just a shortcut for 'cl', which I almost never need. Since I don't assume it was put in to be complete or something, I'm

Re: s?

2006-06-30 Thread Eric Arnold
I can't remember why or when (it was so long ago), but I've always used 's' and 'S' in 'vi'. It never really occured to me to use 'cl' instead. It was just another command in the list. It was part of the original 'vi', but I'm not sure if you meant that by 'put in to be complete'. It is no