Hi, On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 7:34 AM, Yegappan Lakshmanan <yegapp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 10:13 PM, Jan Gosmann <vim-dev-git...@256bit.org> > wrote: >> I can definitely do that, but might take me a few days. >> >> Also, I already took a look at the code myself and was considering moving >> the restofline label to line 847. I suppose which of these is the proper fix >> depends on whether it makes sense to use %> with the O/P/Q patterns. There >> is also a line fields->valid = TRUE; that would then be executed. Not >> entirely sure what the effect of that would be. >> > > Your suggestion will also work. Some user may try to use %> with the > O/P/Q patterns. So it is better to move the restofline label. The valid field > is used to track whether the matched quickfix entry is a valid one (with a > filename and line number) or not. As we are starting over to find a new match, > it makes sense to set the field to TRUE again. >
I am attaching a patch for this issue with a test for this case. - Yegappan -- -- 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/d/optout.
Description: Binary data