Lcd wrote:
> > > On 7 July 2016, Bram Moolenaar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Christian Brabandt wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Do, 07 Jul 2016, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There has been a request that when adding items to the
> > > > > > quickfix list, no buffer is created to hold the file name.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The reason is that when there are many different file names
> > > > > > this causes the buffer list to get very long, which then
> > > > > > causes various operations to become slow. Including finding
> > > > > > the buffer for a file name.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Instead of using a buffer, where the file name is stored, and
> > > > > > then using the buffer number, the file name itself could be
> > > > > > remembered.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since there are so many quickfix commands, adding a flag to
> > > > > > every one of them would be creating quite a mess. We could
> > > > > > add an option, but that has the danger of forgetting to reset
> > > > > > the option after the operation. And it requires three more
> > > > > > statements (save current value, set the option, restore th
> > > > > > option). So I was thinking of using a command modifier:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > :usefname caddexpr {expr}
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How about that?
> > > > >
> > > > > That means, the buffer would only be created once you are
> > > > > jumping to the file?
> > > >
> > > > Yes.
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > This would be a huge setback for plugins that expect error
> > > items to always have access to a buffer if they refer to a file
> > > at all. Essentially it would be the end of filtering operations
> > > for syntastic (and probably the end of life for syntastic on newer
> > > versions of Vim).
> >
> > I don't understand. What does "access to a buffer" mean?
>
> Syntastic is a sort of generalised compiler set, it runs external
> compilers, and shows the results in a loclist. Except it does a lot
> more than just open the loclist: it places signs, adds highlighting
> patterns, shows errors in balloons, shows the nearest error, and so
> on. There is some bookkeeping involved, and syntastic needs actual
> buffers to set local options, local variables, place signs, munge error
> messages according to context, check that error lines are not outside
> the file, and the like. Could all that be done starting from filenames?
> Probably, with a rewrite from scratch of the core. Somebody else might
> even take up that task some day.
>
> > Anyway, the idea was that this is only used for specific purposes
> > where a buffer is not needed, e.g. a list of matches for "grep".
>
> The point is, there will be two kinds of loclists: "rich" ones (with
> buffers), and "poor" ones (with filenames). Syntastic would need to
> deal with both.
I don't see the problem. If syntastic wants to do something that
requires a buffer, then it opens that buffer. The only difference is
that the buffer is created later, not when the item is added to the
quickfix list.
--
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
247. You use www.switchboard.com instead of dialing 411 and 555-12-12
for directory assistance.
/// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
/// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org ///
\\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///
--
--
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.
