Hi,
I recently cleaned up the layout of my .vimrc. I have this in it;
set foldlevel=99
set foldmethod=syntax
let vimsyn_folding='af'Vim script
...
set modelines=2
vim:foldmethod=marker:foldlevel=0
Now, when I open .vimrc, all folds are closed, good. I open a fold, move to
another
On 2014-09-10 22:48, John Little wrote:
Is this reproducible if you run vim multiple times in a row for
each file separately? How many times this file may be duplicated
in your free RAM?
Completely reproducible
The file is only 104 MiB, my computer has about 2 GiB unused, it's
always
On 11 September 2014, Tim Chase v...@tim.thechases.com wrote:
On 2014-09-10 22:48, John Little wrote:
Is this reproducible if you run vim multiple times in a row for
each file separately? How many times this file may be duplicated
in your free RAM?
Completely reproducible
The
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 10:55:23 PM UTC+12, Tim Chase wrote:
You've checked that the input and output files are the same size?
To the byte, as is the reverse sorted file.
I'd also be interested in what Vim thinks the file-type is in each
case.
That was an early thought, maybe file
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 10:55:23 PM UTC+12, Tim Chase wrote:
You've checked that the input and output files are the same size?
To the byte, as is the reverse sorted file.
I'd also be interested in what Vim thinks the file-type is in each
case.
That was an early thought, maybe file
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 11:57:56 PM UTC+12, LCD 47 wrote:
I think encoding might also account for the difference.
I think you are on to something there. If I sanitize the sorted file with
:%s/[^ -~]//g
there 14 substitutions on 13 lines, and then save and exit, that file no longer
has
when i press * it changes the font to bold
thanks
--
--
You received this message from the vim_use maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
---
You received this message because you are
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 5:10:22 AM UTC-5, xavier jmlucjav wrote:
Hi,
I recently cleaned up the layout of my .vimrc. I have this in it;
set foldlevel=99
set foldmethod=syntax
let vimsyn_folding='af' Vim script
...
set modelines=2
vim:foldmethod=marker:foldlevel=0
John Little wrote:
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 10:55:23 PM UTC+12, Tim Chase wrote:
You've checked that the input and output files are the same size?
To the byte, as is the reverse sorted file.
I'd also be interested in what Vim thinks the file-type is in each
case.
That was an early
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 7:42:06 AM UTC-5, John Little wrote:
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 11:57:56 PM UTC+12, LCD 47 wrote:
I think encoding might also account for the difference.
I think you are on to something there. If I sanitize the sorted file with
:%s/[^ -~]//g
there 14
On 11 September 2014, Ben Fritz fritzophre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 7:42:06 AM UTC-5, John Little wrote:
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 11:57:56 PM UTC+12, LCD 47 wrote:
I think encoding might also account for the difference.
I think you are on to something
thanks Ben,
hidden is set, and besides this happens without modifying .vimrc so I guess
it has nothing to do with hidden.
I don't want to use multiple tabs/windows, I am pretty sure this can be
made to work as I want...
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Ben Fritz fritzophre...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2014-09-11 10:02, Sonny Chee wrote:
I have access to a Linux (Ubuntu 14.04 LTS) instance with a vim
install. When I ssh into that box with Cygwin, Vim works fine.
When I access the instance from a Linux OS, Vim displays odd
unprintable characters and the cursor gets offset by an extra line
Hi Sonny!
On Do, 11 Sep 2014, Sonny Chee wrote:
Hey Guys,
I have access to a Linux (Ubuntu 14.04 LTS) instance with a vim install.
When I ssh into that box with Cygwin, Vim works fine. When I access the
instance from a Linux OS, Vim displays odd unprintable characters and the
cursor
Hi jmlucjav!
(please don't top poste)
On Do, 11 Sep 2014, jmlucjav wrote:
thanks Ben,
hidden is set, and besides this happens without modifying .vimrc so I guess
it has nothing to do with hidden.
Hidden should fix it, unless some kind of autocommand resets this. How
are you changing
On Do, 11 Sep 2014, Dj Asi wrote:
when i press * it changes the font to bold
Ask the plugin author.
Best,
Christian
--
Beschaue doch jeder junge Künstler seine Studien im Büchelchen
und Portefeuille und überlege, wie viele Blätter er davon auf jene
Weise genießbar und wünschenswert hätte
Hi,
I have been very happy using vim 7.2 under windows, but was wondering if i
download and install vim 7.4, will that undo all my plugins, customizations,
etc. that i have set up currently under 7.2?
I'd like to try the new one, but don't want to loose the customizations i have?
Thanks,
thanks Ben,
hidden is set, and besides this happens without modifying .vimrc so I
guess
it has nothing to do with hidden.
Hidden should fix it, unless some kind of autocommand resets this. How
are you changing buffers and does using either the command prefix :noa
or :set ei=all fix
Hi,
I have been very happy using vim 7.2 under windows, but was wondering if i
download and install vim 7.4, will that undo all my plugins, customizations,
etc. that i have set up currently under 7.2?
I'd like to try the new one, but don't want to loose the customizations i have?
Thanks,
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:53 PM, russurquha...@verizon.net wrote:
Hi,
I have been very happy using vim 7.2 under windows, but was wondering if i
download and install vim 7.4, will that undo all my plugins, customizations,
etc. that i have set up currently under 7.2?
I'd like to try the
On Friday, September 12, 2014 4:28:58 AM UTC+12, LCD 47 wrote:
To the initial poster: to rule out all interferences, does anything
change if you run something like this:
$ time vim -u NONE -i NONE -N -X file.txt -c q
No.
Regards, John Little
--
--
You received this message
On Friday, September 12, 2014 2:55:17 AM UTC+12, Ben Fritz wrote:
I have an idea:
If the unsorted file has bad characters early in the file, then the early
encodings in 'fileencodings' will fail quickly.
But if the sorted file places those bad characters late in the file, then the
Hey Guys,
In both cases, echo $TERM yields:
xterm
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 11:36:40 AM UTC-7, Christian Brabandt wrote:
Hi Sonny!
On Do, 11 Sep 2014, Sonny Chee wrote:
Hey Guys,
I have access to a Linux (Ubuntu 14.04 LTS) instance with a vim install.
When I
On Friday, September 12, 2014 2:35:40 AM UTC+12, Charles Campbell wrote:
Have you tried profiling?
Just did (about a decade since I last used a profiler at this, C, level).
Compiled and linked with -pg, as advised in src/Makefile.
Execution time is dominated by ml_updatechunk in memline.c.
On 11 September 2014, John Little john.b.lit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, September 12, 2014 2:55:17 AM UTC+12, Ben Fritz wrote:
I have an idea:
If the unsorted file has bad characters early in the file, then
the early encodings in 'fileencodings' will fail quickly.
But if the
On 12 September 2014, LCD 47 lcd...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
That's because your test file contains character \x83, which is
illegal in latin1. Try ucs-bom instead.
The point being not that \x83 is legal in ucs-bom, but that ucs-bom
fails immediately since there's no BOM at the beginning
On September 12, 2014 5:40:11 AM GMT+03:00, John Little
john.b.lit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, September 12, 2014 2:55:17 AM UTC+12, Ben Fritz wrote:
I have an idea:
If the unsorted file has bad characters early in the file, then the
early encodings in 'fileencodings' will fail quickly.
27 matches
Mail list logo
