Alejandro Hernandez wrote:
> Testing plugins in isolation is frequently done. Under the current
> system, all
> plugins one wants to test have to be moved under `opt` to be able to
> use `:packadd`. Relying on `:runtime` is both error-prone and
> cumbersome. There's no need for the user to replicate `:packadd`
> functionality using `:runtime`, because there are things one needs to
> take into account (sourcing all plugin files, adding to runtimepath),
> which would be better done by `:packadd`.
>
> I propose changing `:packadd` behavior to load ANY plugin, whether
> it's in `opt` or `start`, defaulting to doing nothing if it was added
> already. This idempotent and least-surprise behavior is what I
> expected from `:packadd` before I read the documentation.
>
> Adding an argument to `:packadd` is also fine, although a bit more
> "surpriseful".
That is a reasonable request. If the "start" packages were not loaded
then :packadd can also look there.
--
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
114. You are counting items, you go "0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D...".
/// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@Moolenaar.net -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
/// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org ///
\\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///
--
--
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
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_use" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_use+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment