Daniel Carl Leonardo Taccari <iaml...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Daniel, > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 03:12:15PM +0100, Daniel Carl wrote: > > These are axamples of those commands that exists only in normal mode. To map > > them you could use something like (<C-O> and <C-I> are vimb normal mode > > commands and are known from vim). > > > > nmap b <C-O> > > nmap B <C-I> > > > > Thanks for that! But why I can not find CTRL-O and CTRL-I in vimb(1) man > page?... It seems that <C-O> and <C-I> is equivalent to UP and DOWN, isn't > it? (from vimb(1)): > > [...] > [N]UP Go back N steps in the browser history. > [N]DOWN Go forward N steps in the browser history. > [...]
You're right, the UP and DOWN thing was a temporary implementation fault that I documented in man page and does not work anymore. I'll remove this soon. And also the <C-O> and <C-I> bindings where missed, that's my fault. > I don't know what they are the vim counterpart because I am a nvi user. > Maybe it should be documented in vimb(1) and/or it should be added a "SEE > ALSO" section that points to vim(1). > IMO it would be better to have all them documented into vimb(1) (I can read > them in src/normal.c in normal_navigate()). I'm your option too. All the commands should be described in man page. But the last release was a hard work for me, with a lot of changes and somewhere in the past, I lost the orientation what I've to change in the man page too. I'll spent more time to keep also the man page up to date. > > The 'normal' command is an ex-command and should be written with ':' in the > > binding. > > > > nmap :normal! ... > > > > But this isn't necessary, the 'normal' commands is only a way to call normal > > mode commands from none normal modes. For example if multiple ex-commands > > are > > chained together ':set scripts=on|normal! r'. > > > > I'm not sure what the intension of 'nmap b normal! <Up>' is, but if you want > > to scroll the page up, 'nmap b k' should to the thing. The <Up> and <Down> > > keys are handled from gtk or webkit and not from vimb. That means if you > > bind > > those keys to 'b' and press key, vimb translates the 'b' into <Up> and > > writes > > the <Up> into the internal key queue. But vimb does not know what <Up> > > means. > > And at the moment there exists no logic to convert such unknown commands > > into > > fake key event that are fired to force webkit or gtk to some actions. And > > I'm > > not sure if this is a useful thing to have or if this will be possible to > > implement in a clean way. > Thank you for the clarification. The intention was using <Up> and <Down> like > <C-O> and <C-I> in order to imitate the "back" and "forward" ex-ex commands. > :) > > Personally I think that convert the commands into fake key event are not very > useful. I'm glad to read this. > > > I prefer to have all commands that was present in the previous releases, > > > they make vimb usage simpler (...and if, for example, I forget the > > > keybinding I can always type ":back" or whatever!...). > > Hm, this could be a useful feature. I've seem it for pentadactyl that you > > can > > alias ex-commands and vim has also a way to define new ex-commands. But I've > > never seen the need for such a feature. I think you are faster if you learn > > the most common normal mode commands instead of waiting that the command > > alias > > feature will be implemented:) > Maybe yes, but at the moment I will try to learn the normal mode commands. ;) That's a good decision:) Daniel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation. Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ vimb-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vimb-users
