Xavier de Gaye wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 5:18 PM, Xavier de Gaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It is not clear if netbeans "killed" events are correctly sent by Vim. > > ... > > Conclusion: > > As it is, "killed" events are useless for the netbeans application > > (but they cannot be ignored as the bufno reference is not anymore > > valid after receiving the event). > > I would like to propose to remove the global netbeansCloseFile > > entirely from the code, expecting that this would cause a "killed" > > event whenever a buffer is not anymore visible in any window, but I > > don't know Vim code sufficiently to be sure that this is the case. > > > I have missed the following important point: the Vim signs placed in > the buffer are removed by bdelete and by bwipeout, but not by bunload > or by any other Vim command. > > The netbeans application must keep track of the Vim signs, so I > suggest: > * the semantics of the "killed" event is: > the bufno reference is invalid > the signs have been removed by Vim > * the code is changed so that only bdelete and bwipeout > trigger a "killed" event (not bunload) > * the documentation is updated accordingly One wonders what the original meaning for "killed" is: buffer deleted or unloaded? I don't know. What is more useful? Perhaps we need both a "killed" and an "unloaded" event? -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 227. You sleep next to your monitor. Or on top of it. /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\ download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org /// \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
