On 05/05/09 07:50, Dominique Pellé wrote: > _Lone wrote: [...] >> Hi Dominique, >> >> Could you please try cursor column without the patch and see what that >> does? I implemented the margincolumn to behave similar to cursorcolumn >> so I think they both would behave the same. But still it would be good >> to check without margincolumn patch to make sure there is no >> regression. >> >> I am not sure how to handle multi-byte characters. My experience is >> limited with that. Anyone has any suggestions? >> >> Thanks >> _Lone > > > Confirmed: Pristine Vim-7.2.166 has the same odd behavior > when doing ":set cuc" with characters using 2 display cells > (utf-8 on Linux with xterm as well as with gvim (GTK2). > > So this behavior is not introduced by the margincolumn patch. > > See this screenshot with gvim-7.2.166 GTK2: > > http://dominique.pelle.free.fr/pic/gvim-cuc.png > > cursorcolumn is supposed to be highlighted in grey. > The cuc is not highlighted in some lines. The red square > at the top is the location of the cursor. > > -- Dominique
Looking at the screen shot makes it obvious that "wide" characters are only highlighted by 'cuc' if their starting (left) character cell is in the cursor column. A simple test shows that ^X symbols for control characters and <xxxx> placeholders for non-displayable Unicode codepoints behave the same. OTOH only one cell of the space occupied by hard tabs is highlighted, regardless of whether 'list' is on (with a "tab:" part present in 'listchars') or off, and of where in the tab the cursor column happens to pass. All this for 'cursorcolumn' since I haven't installed this patch (yet?) Best regards, Tony. -- You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
