On 04-Jun-2012 09:17:48 -0700 (PDT), Ben Fritz wrote:
> [15 sentences deleted]
> However, I think this behavior is confusing, and there is a very small
> window of time in an editing session during which the new behavior can
> actually be used.
Right, the change is miniscule, but I don't think the new behavior is
inconsistent or unexpected. It now amounts to a default "previous acted-on
selection" of one character / line, and the original 1v behavior isn't affected
at all.
> I think a new option, or a new 'cpo' flag, may be
> needed to switch between the behaviors entirely if both are desired.
Please no new option. I've already shown that the alternative, overriding 1v
altogether, is trivial to implement in Vimscript.
http://groups.google.com/group/vim_dev/msg/356e55ed40643ea2
This could be placed (in commented for) in vimrc_example.vim.
> I prefer the old behavior over the new.
No arguments here. In fact, I would like to have a 1v variant that also applies
the last selection to the current position when is was *not* yet acted on, to
"clone" the previous selection to another place. [count]gv isn't taken yet; I
would love to see at patch for that.
-- regards, ingo
--
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
