On Saturday, April 20, 2013 6:50:58 AM UTC+9, glts wrote: > On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Ingo Karkat wrote: > > With v:motiontype, I'd expect that to be applicable to _every_ motion, > > not just those few special ones. I would prefer v:forcedmotiontype. The > > only saving grace for this unreadable monster is that it's probably not > > going to be used very much. > > I don't care too much about the name, to be frank. In the end it's > mostly a matter of taste. > > But let me rephrase my argument in favour of v:motiontype. The docs say > that the variable is empty when no motion type is given. Empty > essentially means "use the default motion type". "v/V/<C-V>" means > "override the default motion type with X-wise motion". So in any case > the variable asserts something about the type of motion.
+1 to v:motiontype. -- -- 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 vim_dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
