oh, I mistook "noremap" for "nnoremap" . What I wanted to say was that nnoremap's rhs should concern about input when [count] was given in order to avoid "E481: No range allowed" . However, in this case, that's not the case I said because the patch is "noremap", not "nnoremap" .
or more paranoially, it'd be better if it is like the followings? vnoremap <buffer> <silent> <Leader>o :call <SID>new_changelog_entry()<CR> onoremap <buffer> <silent> <Leader>o :call <SID>new_changelog_entry()<CR> nnoremap <buffer> <silent> <Leader>o :<C-u>call <SID>new_changelog_entry()<CR> but s:new_changelog_entry() does not seem to support about input when [count] was given. so the input is out of the support of changelog.vim I think that changelog.vim doesn't have to support that. On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 6:28 PM, mattn <[email protected]> wrote: >> It'd be better if rhs is ":<C-u>call ..." instead of ":call ..." > > Do you mean that avoid to call the function with :'<,'>? However, this > function don't work for contents in visual selection. > > > > -- > 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 -- 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
