On Sun, March 6, 2011 3:20 am, Donald Allen wrote:
Yes, you are right (in fact, that's how I proceeded after realizing
undo didn't restore the register stack). But I'm talking about
ease-of-use and efficient editing, and 'p' is a lot faster and easier
to type than '0p' (after all, this is the
In this case, I'd yanked some text that I wanted to 'put' in
a bunch of places. While going through the buffer, putting the text
where I wanted it, I noticed a line that needed to come out, so I
deleted it. Naturally, the next attempt to put gave me that line
instead of the original text I'd
Donald Allen donaldcal...@gmail.com:
Let's consider this a feature request, then. I think it's completely
reasonable to expect 'undo' to reverse the side-effects of an undone
command, where that's possible (I wouldn't expect it to undo the
changes to the filesystem as a result of a write
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 7:26 AM, Jan Larres li...@majutsushi.net wrote:
Donald Allen donaldcal...@gmail.com:
Let's consider this a feature request, then. I think it's completely
reasonable to expect 'undo' to reverse the side-effects of an undone
command, where that's possible (I wouldn't
If you delete a line, it gets pushed onto the register stack (the line
lands in the register). If you then undo the delete with 'u', the
register stack doesn't get popped -- it remains as it was just prior
to the 'undo'. So the undo has not undone all the effects of the
command you are undoing.
On Mar 5, 10:04 am, Donald Allen donaldcal...@gmail.com wrote:
If you delete a line, it gets pushed onto the register stack (the line
lands in the register). If you then undo the delete with 'u', the
register stack doesn't get popped -- it remains as it was just prior
to the 'undo'. So the
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, Donald Allen wrote:
If you delete a line, it gets pushed onto the register stack (the line
lands in the register). If you then undo the delete with 'u', the
register stack doesn't get popped -- it remains as it was just prior
to the 'undo'. So the undo has not undone all
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Benjamin R. Haskell v...@benizi.com wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, Donald Allen wrote:
If you delete a line, it gets pushed onto the register stack (the line
lands in the register). If you then undo the delete with 'u', the
register stack doesn't get popped -- it
On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 01:31:50PM -0500, Donald Allen wrote:
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Benjamin R. Haskell v...@benizi.com wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, Donald Allen wrote:
If you delete a line, it gets pushed onto the register stack (the line
lands in the register). If you then
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 6:43 PM, James Vega james...@jamessan.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 01:31:50PM -0500, Donald Allen wrote:
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Benjamin R. Haskell v...@benizi.com wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, Donald Allen wrote:
If you delete a line, it gets pushed
On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 09:20:16PM -0500, Donald Allen wrote:
Yes, you are right (in fact, that's how I proceeded after realizing
undo didn't restore the register stack). But I'm talking about
ease-of-use and efficient editing, and 'p' is a lot faster and easier
to type than '0p' (after all,
Christian J. Robinson wrote:
If I'm editing an encrypted file then use the same Vim session to edit
a non-encrypted file, the saved undo information for the non-encrypted
file is garbled when it is read.
To reproduce, you need an existing, non-encrypted file that has undo
information
12 matches
Mail list logo
