Re: question re: form of function names in vimscript

On Tue, 14 Sep 2010, hsitz wrote:

> On Sep 14, 10:40 am, "Benjamin R. Haskell" wrote:
>> [ . . . ]
>> This is an autoload function, explained in-depth at:
>>
>> :help write-library-script
>>
>> The short story is that the first components are path and filename
>> components (sans '.vim') that identify the autoload path.  The last
>> is the function name.
>>
>
> Ben -- Thanks very much for the info. First time I've been aware of
> these autoload libraries.
>
> One strange thing, though, is that I've added a function to a ftplugin
> script (not in an autoload directory) and using the
> <filename>#<function-name> naming mechanism seems to work fine, even
> without capital letters and without s:.

Interesting. Slightly odd that it's not strict about it.

> I gather there's no real benefit from naming them that way, just
> thought it was a little odd that no error was thrown.

Yes, I don't think there's a benefit to naming them that way when
outside the 'autoload/' path. And in fact a drawback is that they look
like autoload-able functions, but they're not.

--
Best,
Ben

--
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