> On Jan 16, 2012, at 4:39 PM, Chris Lott wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Eric Weir wrote:
> >>> As discussed recently in a parallel thread, if you have flowing
> >>> text where paragraphs are reflowed inserting linebreaks (rather
> >>> than your paragraphs being all on one line), it's not quite as
> >>> useful. For that, you might investigate "wdiff" to compare the
> >>> files.
> >>
> >> Hmm. Haven't encountered the concept of "flowing" text previously.
> >> I believe my paragraphs have two linebreaks between them.
> >
> > I believe "flowing text" is referring not to the line breaks between
> > paragraphs, but having paragraphs each be one long line of text
> > (rather than breaking each line with a line break as the quoted text
> > above does), which is sometimes (often?) the preferred mode when
> > working with prose.
>
> Still not quite clear about the concept of "flowing" and "reflowed"
> text. The way Tim put it makes it sound like all paragraphs, not just
> each paragraph, on one line.
Don't get hung up on the words, particularly not on flowing words. You
know what a paragraph is. So you can write a paragraph on one line, as
you did in your mail. But see how I reformatted (reflowed) the paragraph
you wrote above (using the gqq command - see :h gqq)? (Using vim to
compose mail.)
And here's another paragraph you wrote; going to leave that one flowing
as it is for the sake of the example (although I prefer mail text to be
formatted old-fashioned style).
> I'm not sure what I have. I have vim set to wrap lines at the screen, but I don't think there's any wrapping in the file. So does my text "flow" or not?
And I think that's all there is to it.
--
Michael Ludwig
--
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