On Mi, 18 Sep 2019, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> Let's be practical: We fixed something because a user complained and it
> was clear it had to be fixed. For "x" deleting a line we did not get
> complaints. And, depending on how you look at it, if "l" crosses line
> boundaries, it makes sense that "x" does too. Think of editing a
> paragraph with wrapped lines, then repeating "x" should not get stuck
> when the line gets empty.
okay fine. I am still worried, that we are possibly deleting a line
content, that is not wanted (e.g. when virtualedit is active and the
cursor is on a NUL).
So perhaps it would be better that 'x' in that case works like 'gJ'
(which does effectively only delete the line break).
And for consistency, we should to translate X to either 'dd' or "-gJ"
when 'h' is in whichwrap, right?
Best,
Christian
--
Aber kein Genuß ist vorübergehend: denn der Eindruck, den er
zurückläßt, ist bleibend.
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (Lehrjahre)
--
--
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].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/20190918114612.GK30959%40256bit.org.
