On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 01:50:48PM +0000, david sowerby wrote: > Thanks for the quick reply. I can live without "co" and "m", it was mostly > curiosity on my part. Maybe the "show-commands" should have "not implemented > yet" added? and thanks for all the work :-)
agreed. When I switch back to vile, I'll probably do that, as well as making some notes on why it's not done -- perhaps "only" the syntax, which would require some work to permit the address adjacent to the command-name -- unlike all of the other commands. > > ========================================== > Inertia is the most powerful force in the Universe. > > > On Thursday, June 6, 2024 at 01:09:57 AM PDT, Thomas Dickey > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 05:05:30AM +0000, david sowerby wrote: > > According to the O'Reilly book Vile doesn't have the vi 'move' command (or > > the 'copy' one either?) But checking through Vile's "show-commands" they are > > both described -- 'move-til' and 'copy-til'. But they don't work :-( > > ...........or am I doing something wrong? A search in the Archives gives no > > result. Another month another question. > > They are in the symbol table for completeness, but as the message says, > not implemented. The reason for the omission is that (without a lot of > work, of course), the vi-compatible syntax wouldn't work with the way > vile's ":" line is parsed: > > + vi works by reading the whole line all at once, and picking out what > it needs. > > + vile works by accepting the line in steps which allow for > name-completion and scrolling through the history. > > The basic scheme of parsing in steps dates from the early 1990s. > Later in the 1990s, I did a lot of the name-completion and > history mechanism. > > While _that_ has some quirks (which I've gotten used to, and > overlook), getting that to work well took a lot of time :-) > > The archives don't go back that far, of course (looks like that began in > January 2006). Paul Fox used to run a mailing list on his machine. > I'm not aware of an archive for that, and don't have a complete set. > > There was some occasional discussion of the above points, and I probably > have some relevant mail, but digging it out would take some work :-( > > The code in its current form dates from 1996, with some reformatting in 2001: > > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): /* ARGSUSED */ > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): int > 1.290 (tom 15-Mar-97): unimpl(int f GCC_UNUSED, int n GCC_UNUSED) > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): { > 1.453 (tom 21-Aug-01): mlwarn("[Sorry, that vi command is > unimplemented in vile ]"); > 1.453 (tom 21-Aug-01): return FALSE; > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): } > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): int > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): opercopy(int f, int n) > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): { > 1.453 (tom 21-Aug-01): return unimpl(f, n); > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): } > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): int > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): opermove(int f, int n) > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): { > 1.453 (tom 21-Aug-01): return unimpl(f, n); > 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): } > > but the unimpl and related functions date from 1991: > > REV:1.6 main.c 1991/05/31 11:12:19 pgf > > changed args to execute(), and > added linespec character class, and > added unimplemented ex functions > > All of this is in RCS, but I've exported stuff to git - > > https://invisible-island.net/personal/git-exports.html > https://github.com/ThomasDickey/vile-snapshots > https://github.com/ThomasDickey/pgf-vile-snapshots > > -- > Thomas E. Dickey <[email protected]> > https://invisible-island.net > -- Thomas E. Dickey <[email protected]> https://invisible-island.net
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
