On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 11:52:35 PM UTC+1, Sung Pae wrote:
> Apologies for replying to myself here, but I wish to emphasize that I
> am in _complete_ agreement with Kana Natsuno about his proposal. This
> should optimally "just work" without any of the hackery I've posted.
>
> Operators + cursor motions are one of the pillars of the Vim editing
> philosophy and fixing this issue would definitely encourage people to
> create their own innovative FileType-specific motions.
>
> I would be happy to supply a patch if it is acknowledged as a bug, and
> if Kana is not already in the midst of a solution.
I don't know if you saw my other post (Google groups separated it for
some reason) but this has to be a bug. Compare:
dv:norm! viw
d:norm! viw
The first one is put into the redo buffer as is, the second one isn't
(the redo buffer contains "vd" in the second case). The only difference
is the motion force ("v") after the operator.
Looking at the source, I get the impression that this is simply an issue
of an improperly defined condition. I have a working two-line patch
which fixes this but I'd rather give it a little more time.
--
--
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.
