Hari Krishna Dara schrieb: > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Andy Wokula <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hari Krishna Dara schrieb: >>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Andy Wokula <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hari Krishna Dara schrieb: >>>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Kana Natsuno <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>> At least >>>> :map <SNR> >>>> >>>> prints all my <SID> mappings, which include the script numbers, and I >>>> can do e.g. >>>> >>>> :nn <SNR>15_yank :call <SNR>15_yank()<CR> >>>> >>>> at the command line to re-execute what was previously defined by a >>>> script as: >>>> >>>> :nn <SID>yank :call <SID>yank()<CR> >>> This is not a "feature" per se, you are simply finding all those maps >>> that have an <SID> in the front. >> Not only an <SID> (<SNR> actually), but also the script-ID. >> >>> This is not the case that we are trying to point out. Consider these >>> two samples: >>> >>> :nmap <script> <F12> <Plug>SomeScriptLocal >>> :inoremap <expr> <Tab> <SID>expandTab()<CR> >> (sorry these examples hurt the eyes ...) >> >> I'm pretty much aware of that ... you pointed out several things and I >> was only referring to the following paragraph: >> >>>>> If we can extend the :map command to accept an optional scriptID as >>>>> <script:SID>, then we could output map commands with the original SID >>>>> in place, but then there are two issues: >> Again: This functionality is already there (?). >> >>> Are you referring to the <script:SID> format already being there? >> Yes, I did. >> >>> I just checked, it is not there. >> Ah, you want to add a new map-modifier <script:SID> next to <script>, >> <expr>, etc? And with SID replaced by the script number? For example >> >> :nn <script:15> <SID>yank :call <SID>yank()<CR><SID>DoMore >> >> (Please correct this as needed) >> >> But how is this different from >> >> :nn <script> <SNR>15_yank :call <SNR>15_yank()<CR><SNR>15_DoMore >> >>> You could of course call script local functions using the <SNR>_ >>> syntax, but it doesn't serve all cases. >> Ok. >> Which are those cases? >> Which are those cases solved by your suggestion? > > Your suggestion to use <SNR> syntax only serves the cases which > involve calling script local functions, but <script> serves a > different case than that, see ":help <script>". Also, there is no > workaround suggested towards capturing maps with <expr> option yet on > this thread. I am sure we can come up with ways to cover these missing > cases by enhancing existing commands, but I think the :dupmap command > that I am suggestion is the most straight-forward and complete way to > capture an existing map (as it literally copies the map at the lowest > level).
Hmm, for now this seems to get nowhere and you don't want to give more explanation about that one paragraph ... I see the problem with <script>, <expr>, <silent>, <special> etc ... that you don't know if these modifiers were used. At the moment I think your new :dupmap command is a very good idea. -- Andy --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
