> On 07/19/10 11:16, Mark Butler wrote:
>> The behavior of the 'n' command appears to have recently
>> changed. It used to always repeat the last _search_. Now it
>> appears to repeat the search implied by the last _search and
>> replace_, when there has been an intervening search and
>> replace since the last search.
>
> Um, this has been vi behavior since the beginning, AFAICT...I've
> got an older version of nvi as well as vim6.2 (yes, I can hear
> Tony complaining already ;-) and they both behave the same way:
> search for X, do a :%s/Y/Z/ and then use n/N to search for the
> next instance and it will attempt to search for Y (which may or
> may not return results depending on whether you include the "g"
> flag or if you include the search in the replacement) instead of
> X. Same happens in "ed" for that matter (though instead of using
> n/N, you use "/" or "?" to search and just hit <enter> to accept
> the default).
>
> -tim
>
>
:-) I know you were joking, but I'll answer seriously:
I'm not complaining. Keeping legacy versions side-by-side with the
latest and shiniest for comparison purposes is perfectly all right.
Where I'll "complain" is if someone barges in saying "I've found a bug
in Vim 6.2", or, as yesterday, "We need a written and notarized
assurance that Vim 6.3 supports Windows 7".
Best regards,
Tony.
--
ROBIN: (warily) And if you get a question wrong?
ARTHUR: You are cast into the Gorge of Eternal Peril.
ROBIN: Oh ... wacho!
"Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY)
PICTURES LTD
--
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
No comments:
Post a Comment