Re: [vim/vim] bug in persistent undo -- `:earlier 100d` undoes one change instead of all (#1254)

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie mossgary600 via vim_dev
On Sun, 1/8/17, vim-dev ML wrote: Subject: Re: [vim/vim] bug in persistent undo -- `:earlier 100d` undoes one change instead of all (#1254) To: "vim/vim" Cc: "vim-dev ML"

Re: [vim/vim] bug in persistent undo -- `:earlier 100d` undoes one change instead of all (#1254)

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie Nikolay Aleksandrovich Pavlov
2016-11-17 16:49 GMT+03:00 Bram Moolenaar : > > Christian Brabandt wrote: > >> I am quite sure it happens here in undo.c >> >> 2390 if (dosec) >> 2391 val = (long)(uhp->uh_time - starttime); >> >> val will get a negative value, because starttime is less than the time of

Patch 8.0.0150

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie Bram Moolenaar
Patch 8.0.0150 Problem:When the pattern of :filter does not have a separator then completion of the command fails. Solution: Skip over the pattern. (Ozaki Kiichi, clodes #1299) Files: src/ex_docmd.c, src/testdir/test_filter_cmd.vim *** ../vim-8.0.0149/src/ex_docmd.c

Re: Patch 8.0.0148

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie Bram Moolenaar
Hirohito Higashi wrote: > Ah, There is no problem because the function body is in front of the > use point, right? Correct. We changed K function headers to ANSI style, but we haven't removed superfluous declarations. Will do that once in a while. -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an

Patch 8.0.0149

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie Bram Moolenaar
Patch 8.0.0149 Summary::earlier does not work after reading the undo file Problem:":earlier" and ":later" do not work after startup or reading the undo file. Solution: Use absolute time stamps instead of relative to the Vim start time. (Christian Brabandt, Pavel

Re: Patch 8.0.0148

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie h_east
Hi Bram, Ah, There is no problem because the function body is in front of the use point, right? -- Best regards, Hirohito Higashi (a.k.a. h_east) -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more

Re: Patch 8.0.0148

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie h_east
Hi Bram, 2017-1-7(Sat) 23:40:11 UTC+9 Bram Moolenaar: > Patch 8.0.0148 > Problem:When a C preprocessor statement has two line continuations the > following line does not have the right indent. (Ken Takata) > Solution: Add the indent of the previous continuation line. (Hirohito >

Patch 8.0.0148

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie Bram Moolenaar
Patch 8.0.0148 Problem:When a C preprocessor statement has two line continuations the following line does not have the right indent. (Ken Takata) Solution: Add the indent of the previous continuation line. (Hirohito Higashi) Files: src/misc1.c,

Re: [patch] Fix indentation bug of Preprocessor directive continuation line

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie Bram Moolenaar
Hirohito Higashi wrote: > How to reproduce: > - Run vanilla Vim with 'cindent'. > $ vim -Nu NONE +"set cindent" > - Input bellow. > i#if aaa\bbb\ccc > > Expect behavior: > #if aaa\ > bbb\ > ccc > > Actual behavior: > #if aaa\ > bbb\ > ccc > > > After the third line is not

[patch] Fix indentation bug of Preprocessor directive continuation line

2017-01-07 Fir de Conversatie h_east
Hi Bram and list, How to reproduce: - Run vanilla Vim with 'cindent'. $ vim -Nu NONE +"set cindent" - Input bellow. i#if aaa\bbb\ccc Expect behavior: #if aaa\ bbb\ ccc Actual behavior: #if aaa\ bbb\ ccc After the third line is not indent well. NOTE: This behavior