On 2010-04-12, esquifit wrote: > On 12 Abr, 08:00, Gary Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2010-04-11, esquifit wrote: > > > I'm using gVim under Windows XP and set cygwin's bash to be the shell > > > enviroment for gVim. > > > > [...] > > > > > In other words, seems that system correctly expects cygwin syntax > > > but filereadable() still expects Windows native paths. > > > > > Is this an inconsistency, or am I missing some obvious point? Is there > > > any better way to deal with this situation? > > > > What you're missing is that the Vim you're using interfaces with the > > Windows OS primarily via the Windows OS API, which expects > > Windows-style path names, whereas the system() call uses the shell > > to interface with the OS, and you've specified Cygwin bash as your > > 'shell', which expects Cygwin's Unix-style path names. > > > > If you use a Windows gvim and a Cygwin shell, you have to manage > > these path name differences. A number of people on this list have > > come up with partial solutions but none of them have worked > > seamlessly enough to suit me. My solution is to use a Cygwin vim in > > a terminal when I need to use Vim with Cygwin tools and to use a > > Windows gvim when I need to use Vim with Windows tools.
> Thank you for your swift reply. The point you explain below, namely > that filereadable() is part of the interface with the underlying OS > and that system() talks to the configured shell, was already apparent > to me. What I wanted to know was whether this was "intentional" or > not. I understand that there is a natural logic in it, on the other > hand it leads to asymmetric situations like the one I described. I can > live with a workaround though. :) Maybe I still don't understand the question then. It's only asymmetric in your case because you made it so by specifying a Cygwin shell. I guess it's intentional that Vim allows customization to the point that the user can create odd situations for himself if he so chooses. > Regarding the suggestion of using cygwin vim in a terminal, I'd love > being able to do it, but unfortunately the (binary) cygwin > distribution of vim lacks a number of features (present on gVim) which > I absolutely need, and I don't have currently the knowledge nor the > time to attempt to understand how to compile my own version. I understand the time concern. It's pretty easy to do, though, whether you use the source from Cygwin or from Vim's Mercurial repository. The only tricky part I found was getting the right development libraries for the dependencies. Just let us know if you want to try. Also, the convention on this list is to bottom-post. Regards, Gary -- You received this message from the "vim_use" 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 To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
