On Monday, December 17, 2012 11:08:45 AM UTC-6, Mike Morearty wrote: > On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 4:55:50 PM UTC-8, [email protected] wrote: > > > Status: New > > > Owner: ---- > > > Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium > > > > > > New issue 99 by [email protected]: Feature: Extended regular expressions > > > http://code.google.com/p/vim/issues/detail?id=99 > > > > Hi, I just wanted to follow up on this feature patch. There has been no > discussion or response of any kind, and I just wanted to make sure I did it > right. If it's simply a matter of people having more important things they > need to get to first, then that's fine. > > > > This patch adds extended regular expression support to Vim. I added it to > the bugbase on code.google.com, and that got auto-forwarded to this mailing > list. Is that the right way for me to suggest a feature and offer a patch? > > >
Yes, this is a correct way to do it. Bypassing the tracker and going right to the list is generally preferred but all issues entered come here anyway. Eventually Bram may add the patch to his todo list, available at http://code.google.com/p/vim/source/browse/runtime/doc/todo.txt For what it's worth, I think your idea is a good one in general. I don't have much of an opinion on the syntax at this point. This is mostly only useful in a script, so you will need to make sure that it does not interfere with interactive mode. Since you trigger the feature using a new \# flag it shouldn't interfere. I'm not sure if there's any existing convention on the introduction of new regex items. The kind of modifier you are adding, which affects the entire pattern, is normally 2 characters now, e.g. \v \C \V etc. -- 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
