Reply to message «Re: edit alternate file -- e!# vs b!#», sent 18:18:38 24 April 2011, Sunday by Tony Mechelynck:
> Don't forget that with an exclamation mark, if your current buffer (the > one you leave to edit the alternate file) is modified, and not open in > another window, all changes will be lost with no warning. You forgot to add `unless you have set one of 'hidden', 'autowrite', 'autowriteall' options'. I do not know why one may want not to set `hidden' option. Original message: > On 24/04/11 02:41, Bee wrote: > > On Apr 23, 5:00 pm, Tim Chase<[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 04/23/2011 11:54 AM, Bee wrote: > >>> To edit the alternate file, is there any difference between these: > >>> > >>> nnoremap ,g :e!#<cr> > >>> > >>> nnoremap ,g :b!#<cr> > >> > >> While there may be other differences, you can edit unnamed > >> buffers with ":b!#" while ":e!#" requires that the file exist. > >> Additionally, if the file on-disk has changed, using e! will > >> prompt about a reload while b! will simply jump to the unedited > >> buffer. > >> > >> Those are a few differences I sussed out by poking at the edges > >> of the two commands. > >> > >> -tim > > > > Thank you Tim > > > > After doing some tests ":b!#" is the one I like. > > > > It is useful when editing source code, then adding a mapping or > > function to vimrc with a vim help file open. > > > > With the vimrc and help open I can toggle back and forth. > > > > When done ":bn" or ":bp" will take me thru my source files skipping > > the "unlisted"/help files. > > > > -Bill > > Don't forget that with an exclamation mark, if your current buffer (the > one you leave to edit the alternate file) is modified, and not open in > another window, all changes will be lost with no warning. > > Best regards, > Tony.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
