On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 03:33:55PM -0500, Thore B. Karlsen wrote:
>
> Well, I think I've found a solution that works for me. It turns out
> that what was causing my problems was where vim interpreted a number
> following a marker as a fold level. A line like this would mess up my
> folds:
>
> int array[16] = {0};
>
> In those cases it's easy enough to insert a space before the 0, but
> there are cases where it's not that easy, or not desireable.
>
> What I ended up doing was changing fold.c to not look for a fold level
> after a marker, and recompiling. Now everything seems to work great,
> and I don't notice any slowdown.
>
> Perhaps there should be an option for not interpreting numbers after a
> fold marker as a fold level, but I don't know if this is causing
> enough people grief that it would be included. I'm happy with my quick
> fix for now.
I am surprised that {0} is recognized as a fold marker. Do you
have 'foldmarker' set to the default value of {{{,}}} or something else?
In my limited tests (try zc in Normal mode and see whether vim throws an
error message) {0} is not recognized as a fold marker but {{{0}}} is.
HTH --Benji Fisher
