On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Milan Vancura <[email protected]> wrote: > Sure. The only problem is that, in case I pointed out, the error throwing is > not consistent: '99l' run on the previous-to-last char of the line does NOT > throw the error while even simple 'l' run on the last char of the DOES.
Because they're not the same. If you do 9999999l would you expect vi(m) to end up on the last character of a line (barring TRUELY absurd line lengths) or to beep at you if the line was too short and leave the cursor where it is? The fact of the matter is that this "difference" in behavior is vi-compliant. Tom --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
