On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 05:06:50PM +0100, A.J.Mechelynck wrote: > Doesn't linewise folding also suppress information? Yet Vim has had that > for quite some time. It is true that it doesn't make the folds disappear > completely; rather, each outer closed fold is replaced by one line. That > wouldn't work for inline folding; but maybe it could use the 'foldcolumn' > or something to draw attention to the fact that something has been hidden. > > And BTW, the Hidden highlight group (guibg=bg guifg=bg) also "suppresses" > whatever uses it, yet IIUC it is used a lot in helpfiles. I'm not sure > about netrw, but the older Explorer plugin also used it to hide its sort > key.
Both of those hide information, but in a way that is still discoverable/noticeable by the user. Folds show a fold line, and 'ignored' highlights still occupy real estate on the screen. Also, with the colorschemes I've used, you can still see the actual ignored text when the cursor is on the character. When using the conceal functionality, text is completely hidden from the user. (I just saw Vince's reply that this depends on 'conceallevel', so it may not be as unobvious as I originally thought.) This has its place obviously (as evidenced by the patch even existing), but I can understand reluctance to include the patch since it so dramatically affects the display of the buffer. On the other hand, integrating the patch would provide a solution for various itches that I know people want to scratch (mainly to do with builtin previewing of filetypes like html, tex, etc). If it were disabled by default (as I think folding should be), it would allow people that knew of it to take advantage of the functionality without causing novice users to wonder what the heck is going on. James -- GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James Vega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
