Andy Wokula wrote:
> Am 19.05.2010 15:30, schrieb Bram Moolenaar:
> > Andy Wokula wrote:
> >> BTW: How do you now insert a literal <CR> or a literal <NL>?
> >>
> >> abc<CR>def
> >> :s/.*/\="abc\\\<CR>def"/
> >
> > s/.*/\="abc<CR>def"/
> >
> > No need for backslashes. If you want to get \<CR> then you need to use
> > two backslashes:
> > s/.*/\="abc\\<CR>def"/
>
> I know how to get < C R > ;-) Sorry, with "literal <CR>", I meant the
> carriage return character.
>
> With an unpatched Vim, the above :substitute (that one with 3
> backslashes) and the two cited :substitutes below achieve the same
> result (^M = one character):
> abc\^Mdef
>
> >> (or :s/.*/\="abc\\\rdef"/
> >> or :s/.*/\='abc\^Mdef'/ where ^M was inserted with<C-V><CR>)
> >>
> >> It now breaks the line.
>
>
> >> What about backwards compatibility?
> >
> > Yes, that worried me too. But the example of replacing literal text by
> > using submatch(N) is most convincing. The basic idea now is that the
> > expression returns literally what needs to be inserted.
>
> Ok, that is right:
>
> :s/.*/&/
> and
> :s/.*/\=submatch(0)/
> should always give the same result.
>
> > Only problem now is to make it possible to insert a line break. That
> > would be a NUL, but that also terminates the string...
> >
> >> I had a script dealing with conversion of binary data, it's (most
> >> probably) broken now.
>
> Sorry, I should have checked: it's not broken. It takes carriage
> returns, line feeds / null chars as special cases, without using \=.
> So actually, I don't have a good example that needs to insert special
> characters via \= .
>
> >> I also see updates for other scripts due to this patch, e.g.
> >> Vimscript #162, auctex.vim, v2.2.1 -> v2.2.2
> >
> > Not nice. So do we prefer the old solution? That will also allow for
> > inserting a line break again.
>
> I think indeed the problem is backwards compatibility:
> How to write new code, how to fix old code?
> Just ignore older Vims (like auctex does it)? If that is not wanted,
> then something like the following will be needed (untested):
>
>
> if v:version > 702 || v:version == 702 && has("patch407")
> let s:sr_esc = ''
> else
> let s:sr_esc = '\'
> endif
>
> s/.../\=escape(submatch(0), s:sr_esc)/
>
> " or
>
> let s:sr_esc = !(v:version > 702 || v:version == 702 && has("patch407"))
>
> if s:sr_esc
> s/.../\=escape(submatch(0), '\')/
> else
> s/.../\=submatch(0)/
> endif
>
>
> Apparently, this is not easier.
>
> On the other hand: Older scripts, where the author wasn't aware of the
> escaping issue, are magically fixed now.
>
> Hmm, at the moment, I cannot clearly vote for or vote against the patch.
> So my suggestion is to keep it, fix remaining bugs, and wait for
> problems to come ... :-/
I made a fix: Also replace a NL after a backslah to a CR. Please try
this out. I can't think of something that fails after patch 7.2.437.
--
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
90. Instead of calling you to dinner, your spouse sends e-mail.
/// 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.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
