On Thursday, October 24, 2013 10:40:44 PM UTC+2, David Fishburn wrote:
> ...
>
>
>
>
> :buffer # works.
>
> :buffer $ does not, but it may be good to make it work.
>
> Reverse (:#buffer and :$buffer) should not work. VimL syntax is already far
> too complicated for the purpose it is used. Handling # or $ specially for a
> :buffer command will make it even more complicated.
>
>
>
> Note: everything that goes before the command is range. Range is transformed
> into line numbers before command is processed. Thus it does not receive
> information about an exact string that expanded into specific line number.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for the answers guys. So the buffer 691 makes sense now, since I was
> editing a file that was 691 lines at the time I executed:
> :$b
>
>
> So out of this:
> :b#
> - Works as I wanted, go to the alternate.
>
>
> :b$
> E93: More than one match for $
>
>
>
> So in this case, it would be nice to go to the last buffer, essentially
> special casing the {bufname} partial match when it is just the $.
Consider.
:bf[irst]
:bl[ast]
Short, easy to remember. What's not to like?
Best,
--
--
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
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"vim_use" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
