On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 08:45:45AM -0800, Chiel92 wrote:
> Is there any progression on this subject? I'm currently writing a code
> format plugin, which heavily relies on this issue.
While I hesitate to campaign against my own patch, I think a _code_
formatting plugin should either use 'formatexpr' or provide it's own
functionality for the gq command. I don't know the specifics of your
plugin of course, so this is certainly not an absolute maxim.
'formatprg' is meant to be a replacement for the default internal
formatter used by the gq command (and always by gw), which is used
primarily for editing prose, not code.
That said, I still stand behind my argument for switching 'formatprg' to
a buffer-local option and have been happily using it in my own build of
Vim without issue.
Sung Pae
--
--
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
