>
> Christian Brabandt wrote:
>
> > On Fr, 13 Apr 2012, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> >
> > > Can we use another command to list user-defined digraphs? Perhaps
> > > ":dig ?"?
> > >
> > > This patch would also need documentation. And a test would be good too.
> >
> > Updated patch.
> > The patch introduces the following changes:
> > 1) :dig? print only user-defined digraphs
> > 2) :dig? <char1>[<char2>] print an exact match, if 2 chars are given,
> > else print all digraphs matching char1
> > 3) :dig? Number print digraph for decimal value Number
> > 4) :dig! clear all user-defined digraphs
> > 5) :dig! <char1><char2> clear user-defined digraph <char1><char2>
> > 6) documentation update
> > 7) including a test (test85)
>
> Thanks for the quick update.
>
> We don't use ? like this in any command, but somehow it feels right. Or
> would there be something better?
>
> ":dig ? Number" is OK, but this looks like it only works for user
> digraps. I suppose leaving out the ? has the problem that it would look
> like defining a digraph, although ":dig 12" currently gives an error.
> So perhaps we can use that.
So I noticed as well.. I think I was the one who originally mentioned
':dig!' to list user-defined digraphs (without giving it much thought..
it was mostly for the sake of example..) and I may have had the way
':map' vs. ':map!'.. in a mathematical sense, listing two different
subsets:
What I probably had in my mind was something along the lines of ':dig'
-> default digraphs vs. ':dig!' -> custom digraphs.
Personally, I can't say I'm crazy about usin '?' after a command because
it breaks syntax consistency, one of Vim's strong points, I think..
The same goes for using '!' to clear/delete custom digraphs.
CJ
--
WE GET SIGNAL
--
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