On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 at 10:30am, A.J.Mechelynck wrote: > Nikolai Weibull wrote: > > On 10/1/06, Bram Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Nikolai Weibull wrote: > >> > >> > One thing that really annoys me with Vim is the limits it emposes on > >> > what names are legal for user-defined functions and commands. I know > >> > the reason for these restrictions, but I don't think they make much > >> > sense, especially so for user-defined commands. I realize that > >> > overriding :quit does have its implications, but done carefully, this > >> > does allow for some interesting effects. > >> > > >> > So, why not lift the restrictions on valid names for user-defined > >> > functions and commands? > >> > > >> > That is, give me good reasons for why they should be maintained and > >> > I'll drop this request. > >> > >> Predictability. > > > > As in what? That :quit always works as documented? Sure, that's > > great, but if that's the problem, the restriction should be limited to > > commands already defined. And what happens when more commands are > > added? Hell, then they'll break the user-defined commands with the > > same name. Big deal; that's life, you'll get over it - everyone does, > > eventually. > > > > I really don't see the big difference between user-defined commands > > clashing with built-in commands and user-defined commands clashing > > with each other. It'll happen; unless you start adding prefixes or > > namespaces or some other way of separating your commands. But then > > you lose out on simplicity. You don't want to type :NOWCommand (given > > that "NOW" is "my" prefix), and I don't want to type :Command; I want > > to type :command. > > > > Sure, it only saves my fingers from giving up on me for so long, but > > every little bit helps. > > > > I guess my problem is that I want - and I've always wanted - the > > flexibility of Emacs coupled with the simplicity and efficiency of > > Vim's command set and modes. I guess that's why I nitpick at things > > such as this. > > > > nikolai > > > > :command -bar Command ... > :cabbrev command Command > > and then you'll wonder why you can't define a new user-command but it's your > funeral. > > It's still not perfect though; the cabbrev will be expanded even if it's not > at the start (but that may be not-so-bad if you use ":verbose command", > ":vertical command", etc.) > > > Best regards, > Tony.
You can use the Vim7 <expr> abbreviation in combination of getcmdpos() and getcmdtype() to make this a lot more reliable, and avoid expanding everywhere. I have created the cmdalias.vim plugin (http://www.vim.org/script.php?script_id=745) just to address this problem (as it bothered me as well). The only case this breaks is the debug mode because of a bug in Vim (the expression itself is executed in the debug mode). Another oddity in using this approach is the history. If you execute: :command what will end up getting stored in the history is: :Command which means you have to remember to use the righ case while retrieving the last command (:com<Up> will not work). -- HTH, Hari __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
