On Feb 11, 2016 2:16 PM, "Ben Fritz" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 11:58:37 AM UTC-6, Justin M. Keyes wrote: > > "gn" is very useful. But to repeat it, user must press "." over and over. Repeating it with a [count] only applies to the count'th instance, instead of repeating the operation [count] times. This is not how f, t, and / work. > > > > > > Because the current behavior of "gn" with [count] is not useful, I doubt changing the behavior of "gn" would break any plugins. Can the behavior be changed? > > > > > > I thought you were saying "3cgn" or "c3gn" would only edit the third occurrence, which I could see being useful and not necessarily surprising.
"I could see it being useful" applies to almost anything and adds no information. Have you ever used 3cgn intentionally, and been glad that the alternative behavior is not implemented instead? The major use case of gn is to apply an operation in batches. Why insist on a default behavior which stymies that? --- Justin M. Keyes -- -- 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/d/optout.
