Hi Christian, Sorry for the miscommunication there, the previous bullet points were rhetorical so I didn't elaborate on them as much as I normally would. From our chats, it sounds like, in general, you would prefer "(find or) split a window" where my current branch tends to do "fail X unless X[!]" instead. That's trivial to fix though so we can pivot as needed.
Let's get a PR up. This will make much more sense when viewed in context, I think. A PR is here: https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/13903 Thank you! Colin On Monday, January 22, 2024 at 12:12:51 PM UTC-8 Christian Brabandt wrote: > > On So, 21 Jan 2024, Colin Kennedy wrote: > > > Hello again, > > > > Some good news and bad news. > > > > Good news - I have a branch working and it even passing GitHub’s CI, > which is comforting! > > Bad news - I still have many questions ranging from simple things such as > > > > “What should the error code be for when we need to display a message?” > > I picked E922 since it is currently unused but I don’t know if there’s a > standard to the error codes that I’m stepping over > > Good news. I think picking a free error code is fine. Just add a > reference in the help file at :h E922 which should probably sit at the > description of the stickybuf option. > > > • The :drop command has no [!] so 'stickybuf' completely disables > > it. Are we okay with adding [!] so it has a fallback? > > Why do we need this? If the current buffer is a 'stickybuf' buffer, why > can't we open a new window with the :drop command? > > > • Several mappings are disabled during 'stickybuf'. Do we want to > > change :normal! the-disabled-mapping to force the mapping on > > 'stickybuf' windows? :normal! already has an existing, different > > meaning. > > What mappings? By default there shouldn't be any mappings, so why do you > need them to be disabled? If you are talking about certain functionality > such as :b for switching a buffer, I think that should simply just cause > an error and abort for the sticky buffer. > > Regarding the current :norm! meaning: > :norm! executes commands without applying mappings, such that if you do > :nmap k j > you can still use :norm! k to mean go upwards. > > > • Should X group of commands that follow a specific 'stickybuf' > > behavior merge into group Y other-commands-behavior? > > I don't understand this question. > > > And other decision-making related questions like that. Would you > > rather we keep communications to here while each point is sorted out > > or would you want to see a GitHub draft PR sooner and I can place > > remaining questions there? I’m happy to do either. > > Yes, please go ahead and create a PR. So we can easily test it and you > can get better feedback. > > Thanks, > Christian > -- > Physician: One upon whom we set our hopes when ill and our dogs when well. > -- Ambrose Bierce > -- -- 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/32dc8a20-8ca9-4237-aec1-3d424f61619bn%40googlegroups.com.
