Ben Schmidt wrote:
> I think E163 could do with some rewording, or perhaps another error
> could be created. It seems E163 is used when there are less than two
> arguments, and E165 or E164 when there are two or more. However, the
> case when there are zero arguments is confusing. E.g.
>
> vim -u NONE
> :n
> E163: There is only one file to edit
> :prev
> E163: There is only one file to edit
> :argu
> E163: There is only one file to edit
>
> When there is one argument, it makes more sense:
>
> vim -u NONE file
> :n
> E163: There is only one file to edit
> :prev
> E163: There is only one file to edit
> :argu
> (no error)
>
> And when there is more than one, E164 and E165 are used instead, and
> make sense:
>
> vim -u NONE file1 file2
> :prev
> E164: Cannot go before first file
> :n
> :n
> E165: Cannot go beyond last file
> :argu 0
> Zero count
> :argu 3
> E165: Cannot go beyond last file
>
> Perhaps a new error could be created for the zero-argument case which
> says something like "There are no files to edit".
>
> Just a thought, because I got confused by this error today.
Since quite a few users confuse buffers and files, perhaps "the argument
list is empty"?
--
Bad fashion can discourage normal people from interacting with the engineer
and talking about the cute things their children do.
(Scott Adams - The Dilbert principle)
/// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
/// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.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
