On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 4:08 AM, Tony Mechelynck < [email protected]> wrote:
> > On 05/04/09 03:51, Ken Bloom wrote: > > On Fri, 03 Apr 2009 16:04:36 -0500, fREW Schmidt wrote: > [...] > >> Maybe this will give some insight: doing @; gives errors about an > >> invalid register ';' but doing @: is (apparently) a no-op. > > > > Sounds like a bug. : should be a register too. If it interprets @; as > > the ; register, then it should interpret @: as the : register. > > > > --Ken > > > > Under ":help quote:" it is expicitly said that @: should repeat the > latest ex-command. > > You can also use any of > ":p > ":P > :put: > :reg: > > to see what is there. Of course, if it were empty it would be a no-op. > But here, even after using : as the ex-command the register doesn't > become empty, and since it's a read-only register you couldn't do > :let @: = "" That's still a bug though, right? @: doesn't execute the latest ex-command. And @; should map to @: but doesn't... -- fREW Schmidt http://blog.afoolishmanifesto.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
