From: On Behalf Of Donald Allen > Sent: October-17-11 12:00 PM > > My point is that > I believe that most people view a new editing session as a new editing > session, a clean slate.
I read a saying somewhere once: "When someone says 'most people' what they really mean is 'me'." :-) I prefer viminfo on. If you :s/editing/console/ and think about shell history, viminfo is the same thing. I first learned about viminfo when editing source code and noticing that somehow vim was remembering my location in the code. I also recall turning it off, then turning it back on a short while later. > I *am* arguing that it's not > something a new user, or even a user of, say, 6 months duration, is > likely to run across (how many of you have read the whole user manual?). I responded mainly to say this: it occurs to me that the Principle of Least Surprise may be different depending on one's audience. vim is a programmer's/sysadmin's tool, through and through. I think Least Surprise is to have history on. It's too useful to default off. > And responding to your first sentence, doesn't matter how long vim has > been doing this; it matters how likely or difficult it is for a new user > to find out about this. It's section 9 in starting.txt, and :he viminfo brings it up. I think I looked in my home directory to see if something in my .vimrc was saving history and noticed the .viminfo file. That said, perhaps the documentation for / and other affected commands should be updated to mention that they are stored in viminfo if viminfo is enabled. ...Stu -- 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
