hi stepan:
thanks, and see my comment in lines.
On 07/19/2012 04:39 AM, stefan.bittner@bf-consulting.de wrote:
> Hi,
>
> No, in Utl 3.0 there is no way for #tn/tp to wrapscan.
> The intent was to avoid false hits and confusing behaviour.
> I think, th #tn/tp fragements are more useful if you have
> documents that won't change much (any more).
> In a scenario like yours the #r fragment is much more robust.
> I use it a lot. Did you consider it?
I used that one only before, since the pinpoint is quite accurate.
but with that I need to "insert" tags (id=xxx) in the original text.
this is sometime not proper when I don't want to touch the original texts...
>
> In your scenario when you move around text blocks and having
> the #tn/tp fragements work with wrapscan, then the #tn/tp semantic
> would be violated. Meaning a confusing behaviour, I think.
> The idea with #tn/#tp also was to have a semantic like "See below/above"
> resp.
> an above and below really mean above and below.
I agree, this tn/tp is perfectly suitable for the situation you
mentioned ("see below/above")
>
> How about new fragment identifiers, say #tnw/#tpw that would do what
> you want? Or only #t that looks from the beginning of the whole
> text? I'm not sure about it.
personally #t is good/simple and compliant to existing tn/tp, make it a
t/tn/tp jump.
>
> Regards,
> Stefan
>
>
>
>
> Zitat von ping <songpingemail@gmail.com>:
>
>> hi:
>> with tn/tp I can control the search direction, witch is good, but
>> sometime I may constantly
>> moving my text back and forth and then I need to update all my URLs
>> (change tn <--> tp) accordingly.
>> I searched utl doc and don't find a way to just wrap scan the ID texts.
>> is there a way to wrap the scan for the identifier text?
>>
>> thanks!
>>
>> ping
>
>
--
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