On 5/29/07, Yakov Lerner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/29/07, Nico Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What do you think? I prefer (c) from implementation, efficiency and
> > intuitivity perspective.
> I agree. Strongly.

Yes, I agree with (c) , too. I suggested once new type of options to vim that
behaved both like boolean, and numeric. But Bram rejected this. It's a pity
because this would make for lesser number of options. Actually, the
options that would be three-way boolean, and string, and numeric would be
even better.....

An afterthought.
A string-typed  'breakindent' option could work, too. Empty value=off,
0=on, +n, -n.
Another advantage of string option is that you can add
additional flags to it later, without multiplying number of new options
( a-la 'compatible', 'viminfo', 'giooptions' bag-of-flags ). Bram
is always reluctant to add new options, so this can be a consideration.


Reply via email to