On 2013-03-05, Hong Xu wrote:
> On 3/5/13 10:15 AM, Gary Johnson wrote:
> >On 2013-03-05, Hong wrote:
> >>On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 8:16:48 AM UTC-8, Lech Lorens wrote:
> >>>Wouldn't it be better to use the existing 'cinoptions' entry jN? It's
> >>>
> >>>related to Java...
> >>>
> >>
> >>This is also what I am hesitating at. But people who need the
> >>original 'j' option may not need this option (and vice versa) for
> >>the use of their languages (Javascript?), so I finally splitted
> >>them.
> >
> >I can't imagine anyone choosing to have their code formatted as in
> >this example from you:
> >
> > public enum {
> > MON,
> > TUE,
> > }
> >
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> What I mean is they don't need to have this feature. The original use
> of 'j' can also be enabled by default, but it isn't, right?
I see your point, except that I _think_ the reason for not enabling
'j' by default was because it would mess up C formatting. That is
just speculation, though.
If the purpose of the 'j' flag is to "Indent Java anonymous classes
correctly," that suggests to me that it acts as a clue to the
C-indenter that this is not C but Java and that it should do what's
right for Java. If that's true, then I think your fix should be
enabled by this same flag.
> But I do NOT persist on creating a new option. We can finally figure
> out what the best solution is.
Agreed. I'm just looking at this from the perspective of keeping
Vim's options uncluttered. I hope someone more experienced with
Java and the C-indenter can chime in here.
Regards,
Gary
--
--
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 because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"vim_dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
