On 10/02/2026 2:54 AM, Maxim Kim wrote: > https://github.com/vim/vim/issues/21427 > > The help topic for 'modified' specifically mention some events that do not > set it, although missing the Filetype event. Yes, I saw this as well. Perhaps it should be part of the bug-fix.> > On Friday, October 2, 2026 at 4:31:21 PM UTC+10 Maxim Kim wrote: > >> This looks like a bug, worth creating an issue in vim's github. >> >> echo getbufinfo(bufnr()) says that `changed: 0` however `changedtick` is >> greater than 0 >> >> As for >> >>> It's purpose is to automatically insert lines in files that have a >> specified filetype or to provide that service for other files >> >> check :h skeleton >> >> But it would have the same issue as with Filetype >> >> On Friday, October 2, 2026 at 12:41:59 PM UTC+10 Mike wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'm seeing unexpected behavior when using an autocmd defined in a >>> plugin. A simplified version of the plugin is the following: >>> >>> function! InsertText() >>> echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified >>> call append(line("$"), "section title") >>> echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified >>> endfunction >>> >>> autocmd FileType fortran call InsertText() >>> command -nargs=0 ForNoFT call InsertText() >>> >>> It's purpose is to automatically insert lines in files that have a >>> specified filetype or to provide that service for other files. In the >>> above example, I've used "fortran" but I think any vim-recognized >>> filetype will do. >>> >>> To show the problem, edit a Fortran file, e.g. run "vim test.f90". You >>> will see the text "section title" in the buffer. However, even though >>> the 'modified' option is set, I am allowed to quit vim (:q). Also, ^G >>> does not show modified. This behavior occurs whether the file >>> "test.f90" is new or has content. >>> >>> A user-command has been defined in the plugin, intended for files >>> without a filetype. When you run "vim test.unknown" and then run the >>> user-command "ForNoFT", quit will fail as expected and ^G will show >>> modified. >>> >>> Interestingly, if 'modified' is explicitly set in the function, then vim >>> will not quit because it sees test.f90 as modified. >>> >>> My question is why the difference? >>> I'm running vim 9.2.1036 with normal features on Windows 10. >>> >>> Thanks for any help. >>> -mike >>> >>> >>> >>> > -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/119objp%24he5%242%40ciao.gmane.io.
Friday, October 2, 2026
Re: unexpected result using autocmd
Maxim, On 10/02/2026 2:31 AM, Maxim Kim wrote: > This looks like a bug, worth creating an issue in vim's github. Okay, I will do so.> > echo getbufinfo(bufnr()) says that `changed: 0` however `changedtick` is > greater than 0 > > As for > >> It's purpose is to automatically insert lines in files that have a > specified filetype or to provide that service for other files > > check :h skeleton Thanks for the tip. I've never seen this example in help even though it pre-dates Vim 7.0. Learn something new every day.> > But it would have the same issue as with Filetype > > On Friday, October 2, 2026 at 12:41:59 PM UTC+10 Mike wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm seeing unexpected behavior when using an autocmd defined in a >> plugin. A simplified version of the plugin is the following: >> >> function! InsertText() >> echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified >> call append(line("$"), "section title") >> echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified >> endfunction >> >> autocmd FileType fortran call InsertText() >> command -nargs=0 ForNoFT call InsertText() >> >> It's purpose is to automatically insert lines in files that have a >> specified filetype or to provide that service for other files. In the >> above example, I've used "fortran" but I think any vim-recognized >> filetype will do. >> >> To show the problem, edit a Fortran file, e.g. run "vim test.f90". You >> will see the text "section title" in the buffer. However, even though >> the 'modified' option is set, I am allowed to quit vim (:q). Also, ^G >> does not show modified. This behavior occurs whether the file >> "test.f90" is new or has content. >> >> A user-command has been defined in the plugin, intended for files >> without a filetype. When you run "vim test.unknown" and then run the >> user-command "ForNoFT", quit will fail as expected and ^G will show >> modified. >> >> Interestingly, if 'modified' is explicitly set in the function, then vim >> will not quit because it sees test.f90 as modified. >> >> My question is why the difference? >> I'm running vim 9.2.1036 with normal features on Windows 10. >> >> Thanks for any help. >> -mike >> >> >> >> > -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/119obhg%24he5%241%40ciao.gmane.io.
Thursday, October 1, 2026
Re: unexpected result using autocmd
This looks like a bug, worth creating an issue in vim's github.
echo getbufinfo(bufnr()) says that `changed: 0` however `changedtick` is greater than 0
As for> It's purpose is to automatically insert lines in files that have a
specified filetype or to provide that service for other files
check :h skeleton
But it would have the same issue as with Filetype
On Friday, October 2, 2026 at 12:41:59 PM UTC+10 Mike wrote:
Hi all,
I'm seeing unexpected behavior when using an autocmd defined in a
plugin. A simplified version of the plugin is the following:
function! InsertText()
echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified
call append(line("$"), "section title")
echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified
endfunction
autocmd FileType fortran call InsertText()
command -nargs=0 ForNoFT call InsertText()
It's purpose is to automatically insert lines in files that have a
specified filetype or to provide that service for other files. In the
above example, I've used "fortran" but I think any vim-recognized
filetype will do.
To show the problem, edit a Fortran file, e.g. run "vim test.f90". You
will see the text "section title" in the buffer. However, even though
the 'modified' option is set, I am allowed to quit vim (:q). Also, ^G
does not show modified. This behavior occurs whether the file
"test.f90" is new or has content.
A user-command has been defined in the plugin, intended for files
without a filetype. When you run "vim test.unknown" and then run the
user-command "ForNoFT", quit will fail as expected and ^G will show
modified.
Interestingly, if 'modified' is explicitly set in the function, then vim
will not quit because it sees test.f90 as modified.
My question is why the difference?
I'm running vim 9.2.1036 with normal features on Windows 10.
Thanks for any help.
-mike
--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_use" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_use+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/85a1e44b-f2dd-438e-82e4-d1c6b88bc7f7n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: unexpected result using autocmd
Hi all,
I'm seeing unexpected behavior when using an autocmd defined in a
plugin. A simplified version of the plugin is the following:
function! InsertText()
echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified
call append(line("$"), "section title")
echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified
endfunction
autocmd FileType fortran call InsertText()
command -nargs=0 ForNoFT call InsertText()
It's purpose is to automatically insert lines in files that have a
specified filetype or to provide that service for other files. In the
above example, I've used "fortran" but I think any vim-recognized
filetype will do.
To show the problem, edit a Fortran file, e.g. run "vim test.f90". You
will see the text "section title" in the buffer. However, even though
the 'modified' option is set, I am allowed to quit vim (:q). Also, ^G
does not show modified. This behavior occurs whether the file
"test.f90" is new or has content.
A user-command has been defined in the plugin, intended for files
without a filetype. When you run "vim test.unknown" and then run the
user-command "ForNoFT", quit will fail as expected and ^G will show
modified.
Interestingly, if 'modified' is explicitly set in the function, then vim
will not quit because it sees test.f90 as modified.
My question is why the difference?
I'm running vim 9.2.1036 with normal features on Windows 10.
Thanks for any help.
-mike
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/de73247d-1ee9-4ad8-9991-1f7ca8dca8a4n%40googlegroups.com.
unexpected result using autocmd
Hi all, I'm seeing unexpected behavior when using an autocmd defined in a plugin. A simplified version of the plugin is the following: function! InsertText() echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified call append(line("$"), "section title") echomsg "modified option is " .. &modified endfunction autocmd FileType fortran call InsertText() command -nargs=0 ForNoFT call InsertText() It's purpose is to automatically insert lines in files that have a specified filetype or to provide that service for other files. In the above example, I've used "fortran" but I think any vim-recognized filetype will do. To show the problem, edit a Fortran file, e.g. run "vim test.f90". You will see the text "section title" in the buffer. However, even though the 'modified' option is set, I am allowed to quit vim (:q). Also, ^G does not show modified. This behavior occurs whether the file "test.f90" is new or has content. A user-command has been defined in the plugin, intended for files without a filetype. When you run "vim test.unknown" and then run the user-command "ForNoFT", quit will fail as expected and ^G will show modified. Interestingly, if 'modified' is explicitly set in the function, then vim will not quit because it sees test.f90 as modified. My question is why the difference? I'm running vim 9.2.1036 with normal features on Windows 10. Thanks for any help. -mike -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/119n5kq%241mt%241%40ciao.gmane.io.
Wednesday, September 30, 2026
[ANN] vim9ls: a language server for Vim9 script and legacy Vim script
I have released vim9ls.
https://github.com/h-east/vim9ls
vim9ls is a language server for Vim9 script and legacy Vim script, run
by Vim itself.
vim9ls is written in Vim9 script and runs in a Vim of its own, so it
answers from what that Vim knows: its builtin functions, options and
commands, its help files, and the plugins you already have. A new
function or option is there as soon as Vim has it, since nothing is
copied out of Vim. Nothing else needs to be installed.
The diagnostics are Vim's own. The script is read with :source ++dryrun,
which runs nothing in it and compiles its :def functions, so what is
reported is what Vim finds in the script, not what another parser
guesses.
As for the LSP client Vim plugin, I recommend lsp.vim.
https://github.com/h-east/lsp.vim
--
Best regards,
Hirohito Higashi (h_east) --
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/a478630f-712a-4eff-818a-9ebb63648945n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: Looking for someone albe to grant copyrights for a screenshot with Vim
Maybe this is a tangent but maybe this is the leverage you need.
Get an official statement from Linux Foundation regarding the interpretation and application of OSS Licenses in regard to the snapshots you took.
As Christian said, it's already implied by the Licences themselves, but Linux Foundation maybe their experience in contesting/defending OSS rights could offer a reference to legal decisions on record.
Just a thought.
Eric Marceau, 70
Canada
On 2026-09-28 17:51, Maciek Godek wrote:
Thanks for the response.I initially also thought that I if I take a screenshot myself,then I am the author of the screenshot, but the publishersaid that it's an incorrect interpretation, and that I needpermission from the authors of software that I screenshotin order to be able to publish it.
I mean, I understand their point of view - they just want tostay away from any legal trouble, although I do think it leadsto somewhat absurd situations, especially in case of free software
I had one screenshot with tmux running bash running cat,so I wrote to the authors of tmux and bash and cat, and I gottheir permissions (with exception of cat, where I got an indicationthat I don't need any permissions). Frankly, I don't think it wasstrictly necessary, and it would probably be justifiable to depictthis software without any permissions, by simply invoking theirlicenses, but it also gave me an opportunity to reach out tosome people I otherwise probably wouldn't reach out to.
As for now, I invoked the "fair-use" clause for my vim screenshot,and I think it is well justified here. I already sent it to the publisher,and I am waiting for their response.
There's only one week left until the conference starts, so I guessthey might be busy processing the submissions (I think the essaysshould be available some time before the conference, but I don'tknow of any exact rules here)
Best regards,Panicz
poniedziałek, 28 września 2026 o 23:11:34 UTC+2 Christian Brabandt napisał(a):
On So, 27 Sep 2026, Maciek Godek wrote:
> Hi,
> I created an essay for the Onward! conference. The essay has a visual
> (i.e. comic) form, and one of the pages features a monitor with a
> running Vim splash screen. It's going to be published in open access
> under a Creative Commons license.
>
> The publisher, ACM, told me that I need to get permission from the
> authors of all software that I screenshot. And while there might be a
> possibility to use a screenshot on a "fair use" basis, I wonder if
> now, after Bram Moolenar is no longer with us, there is any party
> (like a foundation) that would be able to grant me the right to use
> it?
>
> I can send the page containing the screenshot if needed.
I don't think it is the Vim community that should grant you the rights
to use a random screenshot of Vim. The Vim license itself does not
restrict the use of Vim and from our side, there is no reason you
shouldn't be allowed to use it.
Having said that, isn't the real issue here the copyright of the
screenshot itself, rather than of Vim? If you took the screenshot
yourself you already hold the copyright on it, but if this is someone
else's copyright, you should reach out to the creator of the screenshot
and ask about permission.
Best,
Christian
--
Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be
yours too."
-- Dave Haynie
--
--
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+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/694c2890-f4f6-48dd-af26-b3f9d85eacd0n%40googlegroups.com.
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/69d5fad7-ca7d-4544-9ad9-fd80ec9085a2n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: Looking for someone albe to grant copyrights for a screenshot with Vim
Maybe this is a tangent but maybe this is the leverage you need.
Get an official statement from Linux Foundation regarding the interpretation and application of OSS Licenses in regard to the snapshots you took.
As Christian said, it's already implied by the Licences themselves, but Linux Foundation maybe their experience in contesting/defending OSS rights could offer a reference to legal decisions on record.
Just a thought.
Eric Marceau, 70
Canada
Thanks for the response.I initially also thought that I if I take a screenshot myself,then I am the author of the screenshot, but the publishersaid that it's an incorrect interpretation, and that I needpermission from the authors of software that I screenshotin order to be able to publish it.
I mean, I understand their point of view - they just want tostay away from any legal trouble, although I do think it leadsto somewhat absurd situations, especially in case of free software
I had one screenshot with tmux running bash running cat,so I wrote to the authors of tmux and bash and cat, and I gottheir permissions (with exception of cat, where I got an indicationthat I don't need any permissions). Frankly, I don't think it wasstrictly necessary, and it would probably be justifiable to depictthis software without any permissions, by simply invoking theirlicenses, but it also gave me an opportunity to reach out tosome people I otherwise probably wouldn't reach out to.
As for now, I invoked the "fair-use" clause for my vim screenshot,and I think it is well justified here. I already sent it to the publisher,and I am waiting for their response.
There's only one week left until the conference starts, so I guessthey might be busy processing the submissions (I think the essaysshould be available some time before the conference, but I don'tknow of any exact rules here)
Best regards,Panicz
--poniedziałek, 28 września 2026 o 23:11:34 UTC+2 Christian Brabandt napisał(a):
On So, 27 Sep 2026, Maciek Godek wrote:
> Hi,
> I created an essay for the Onward! conference. The essay has a visual
> (i.e. comic) form, and one of the pages features a monitor with a
> running Vim splash screen. It's going to be published in open access
> under a Creative Commons license.
>
> The publisher, ACM, told me that I need to get permission from the
> authors of all software that I screenshot. And while there might be a
> possibility to use a screenshot on a "fair use" basis, I wonder if
> now, after Bram Moolenar is no longer with us, there is any party
> (like a foundation) that would be able to grant me the right to use
> it?
>
> I can send the page containing the screenshot if needed.
I don't think it is the Vim community that should grant you the rights
to use a random screenshot of Vim. The Vim license itself does not
restrict the use of Vim and from our side, there is no reason you
shouldn't be allowed to use it.
Having said that, isn't the real issue here the copyright of the
screenshot itself, rather than of Vim? If you took the screenshot
yourself you already hold the copyright on it, but if this is someone
else's copyright, you should reach out to the creator of the screenshot
and ask about permission.
Best,
Christian
--
Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be
yours too."
-- Dave Haynie
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/694c2890-f4f6-48dd-af26-b3f9d85eacd0n%40googlegroups.com.
Monday, September 28, 2026
Re: Looking for someone albe to grant copyrights for a screenshot with Vim
On So, 27 Sep 2026, Maciek Godek wrote:
> Hi,
> I created an essay for the Onward! conference. The essay has a visual
> (i.e. comic) form, and one of the pages features a monitor with a
> running Vim splash screen. It's going to be published in open access
> under a Creative Commons license.
>
> The publisher, ACM, told me that I need to get permission from the
> authors of all software that I screenshot. And while there might be a
> possibility to use a screenshot on a "fair use" basis, I wonder if
> now, after Bram Moolenar is no longer with us, there is any party
> (like a foundation) that would be able to grant me the right to use
> it?
>
> I can send the page containing the screenshot if needed.
I don't think it is the Vim community that should grant you the rights
to use a random screenshot of Vim. The Vim license itself does not
restrict the use of Vim and from our side, there is no reason you
shouldn't be allowed to use it.
Having said that, isn't the real issue here the copyright of the
screenshot itself, rather than of Vim? If you took the screenshot
yourself you already hold the copyright on it, but if this is someone
else's copyright, you should reach out to the creator of the screenshot
and ask about permission.
Best,
Christian
--
Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be
yours too."
-- Dave Haynie
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/694c2890-f4f6-48dd-af26-b3f9d85eacd0n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: Looking for someone albe to grant copyrights for a screenshot with Vim
On So, 27 Sep 2026, Maciek Godek wrote: > Hi, > I created an essay for the Onward! conference. The essay has a visual > (i.e. comic) form, and one of the pages features a monitor with a > running Vim splash screen. It's going to be published in open access > under a Creative Commons license. > > The publisher, ACM, told me that I need to get permission from the > authors of all software that I screenshot. And while there might be a > possibility to use a screenshot on a "fair use" basis, I wonder if > now, after Bram Moolenar is no longer with us, there is any party > (like a foundation) that would be able to grant me the right to use > it? > > I can send the page containing the screenshot if needed. I don't think it is the Vim community that should grant you the rights to use a random screenshot of Vim. The Vim license itself does not restrict the use of Vim and from our side, there is no reason you shouldn't be allowed to use it. Having said that, isn't the real issue here the copyright of the screenshot itself, rather than of Vim? If you took the screenshot yourself you already hold the copyright on it, but if this is someone else's copyright, you should reach out to the creator of the screenshot and ask about permission. Best, Christian -- Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be yours too." -- Dave Haynie -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/arrX7iiSAmvFBjt%2B%40256bit.org.
Looking for someone albe to grant copyrights for a screenshot with Vim
--
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/5a26b787-15ca-4d9e-a409-a5dca90f76a6n%40googlegroups.com.
Saturday, September 26, 2026
Re: gvim: browse to select folder not file
On 9/26/2026 7:08 AM, Guido Milanese wrote:
> Question: is it possible to use "browse" to select a folder? Or is there any plugin to do so?
How about :browsedir? See ":help browse".
Hello,I am writing a gvim tool for my students. To select a file I succesfully use "browse": but this command selects a file, not a folder. I know that I could use "Explore" but students are used to GUIs and for this reason browse is perfect. The script is multiplatform so I cannot use tools of Linux, Win, or Mac. And most Windows users do not have python and so Il'' prefer to avoid using python tools.
Question: is it possible to use "browse" to select a folder? Or is there any plugin to do so?
Thanks,guido--
--
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+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/b8f60f98-baaf-41c7-9872-66bcaf895df1n%40googlegroups.com.
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/a8b2d171-3ce7-43b1-ad89-f02969eb6558n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: gvim: browse to select folder not file
Hello,I am writing a gvim tool for my students. To select a file I succesfully use "browse": but this command selects a file, not a folder. I know that I could use "Explore" but students are used to GUIs and for this reason browse is perfect. The script is multiplatform so I cannot use tools of Linux, Win, or Mac. And most Windows users do not have python and so Il'' prefer to avoid using python tools.
Question: is it possible to use "browse" to select a folder? Or is there any plugin to do so?
Thanks,guido--
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/b8f60f98-baaf-41c7-9872-66bcaf895df1n%40googlegroups.com.
gvim: browse to select folder not file
Question: is it possible to use "browse" to select a folder? Or is there any plugin to do so?
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/b8f60f98-baaf-41c7-9872-66bcaf895df1n%40googlegroups.com.
Tuesday, September 22, 2026
feature request - make hardcopy print text properties
Hi all, How easy would it be to extend the hardcopy command to also print any attached text properties? I'm asking because I have a file in which I've underlined various words in the buffer using text properties and would like to print the end result. Syntax highlighting is not an option because a word might be highlighted in one place but not in other places. I've also tried TOhtml but it doesn't do it either. -mike -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/118vanv%24n81%241%40ciao.gmane.io.
Re: No error with ]s when nowrapscan?
On 2026-09-22 22:06, Doug Kearns wrote:
> > $ vim one.txt two.txt three.txt
> > :set hidden nowrapscan
> >
> > I then repeatedly issued
> >
> > :try | exec 'norm ]s' | catch | n | endtry
> >
> > (using @: then subsequently @@ makes this easy) which worked for
> > finding all the misspelled words in the *first* file, but after
> > finding the last one in that file, the ]s *should* fail because
> > there is no "next" bad-spelling in the current file and wrapscan is
> > off. So it seems like the ]s *should* have thrown an exception, get
> > caught, and then go to the :next file instead where the process can
> > repeat. But it seems to silently swallow the "no more bad spellings
> > in the current file" without letting me catch the condition.
[snip]
> You could leverage temporary use of `:set debug=beep`.
A promising proposition, but I'm not sure that's working for me?
I tried the your suggestion with each of
debug=beep
debug=throw
debug=throw,beep
but none of them change the behavior of the ]s (not) throwing an error
to get caught. I do see "Beep!" text at the bottom of my screen when I
expect the exception/catch, but no catchable error seems to happen.
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/CAJ1uvoBK3VZrh-FM1qBEtMnCcAdXGKnBK%2B1QKJLsteZgy_FmZw%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: No error with ]s when nowrapscan?
On 2026-09-22 22:06, Doug Kearns wrote: > > $ vim one.txt two.txt three.txt > > :set hidden nowrapscan > > > > I then repeatedly issued > > > > :try | exec 'norm ]s' | catch | n | endtry > > > > (using @: then subsequently @@ makes this easy) which worked for > > finding all the misspelled words in the *first* file, but after > > finding the last one in that file, the ]s *should* fail because > > there is no "next" bad-spelling in the current file and wrapscan is > > off. So it seems like the ]s *should* have thrown an exception, get > > caught, and then go to the :next file instead where the process can > > repeat. But it seems to silently swallow the "no more bad spellings > > in the current file" without letting me catch the condition. [snip] > You could leverage temporary use of `:set debug=beep`. A promising proposition, but I'm not sure that's working for me? I tried the your suggestion with each of debug=beep debug=throw debug=throw,beep but none of them change the behavior of the ]s (not) throwing an error to get caught. I do see "Beep!" text at the bottom of my screen when I expect the exception/catch, but no catchable error seems to happen. -tim -- -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/arJ3qtqAZvkO2pNO%40thechases.com.
Re: No error with ]s when nowrapscan?
Playing with something recently, I discovered that ]s doesn't seem to
throw any sort of error when wrapscan is off and it hits the end of the
file.
To demonstrate with the following setup (where {one,two,three}.txt are
some files with a couple misspelled words scattered throughout each)
$ vim one.txt two.txt three.txt
:set hidden nowrapscan
I then repeatedly issued
:try | exec 'norm ]s' | catch | n | endtry
(using @: then subsequently @@ makes this easy) which worked for finding
all the misspelled words in the *first* file, but after finding the
last one in that file, the ]s *should* fail because there is no "next"
bad-spelling in the current file and wrapscan is off. So it seems like
the ]s *should* have thrown an exception, get caught, and then go to
the :next file instead where the process can repeat. But it seems to
silently swallow the "no more bad spellings in the current file" without
letting me catch the condition.
AFAICT there's no
:spellnext
type ex command or spellnext() function corresponding to ]s that might
be more error-cooperative.
Is there a better way to go about this?
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/CAJ1uvoC%3DwuKB3u3kA4%3D4Hp1LHSoiK%3De-cz44ts79kyXeSt9R0g%40mail.gmail.com.
Monday, September 21, 2026
No error with ]s when nowrapscan?
Playing with something recently, I discovered that ]s doesn't seem to throw any sort of error when wrapscan is off and it hits the end of the file. To demonstrate with the following setup (where {one,two,three}.txt are some files with a couple misspelled words scattered throughout each) $ vim one.txt two.txt three.txt :set hidden nowrapscan I then repeatedly issued :try | exec 'norm ]s' | catch | n | endtry (using @: then subsequently @@ makes this easy) which worked for finding all the misspelled words in the *first* file, but after finding the last one in that file, the ]s *should* fail because there is no "next" bad-spelling in the current file and wrapscan is off. So it seems like the ]s *should* have thrown an exception, get caught, and then go to the :next file instead where the process can repeat. But it seems to silently swallow the "no more bad spellings in the current file" without letting me catch the condition. AFAICT there's no :spellnext type ex command or spellnext() function corresponding to ]s that might be more error-cooperative. Is there a better way to go about this? -tim -- -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/arFobflska4lvgtE%40thechases.com.
Tuesday, September 8, 2026
Re: timer_start to refresh rulerformat
and then it worked, after update I guess to vim 9.2 (including patch 1-1011) \o/ thank you. -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/14308c5f-ff74-4430-9d91-9d221b9888f8%40sfr.fr.
Monday, September 7, 2026
Re: ShellCmdPre autocommand ?
hello, On Mon, Sep 07, 2026 at 05:30:56PM -0700, Maxim Kim wrote: > What about > :!<CTRL-R><CTRL-f> ? worth to mention but something like :r!dpkg -r <cfile> is reusable from history so you can type it once and use it repeatedly and <cfile> updated. not only :r!dpkg -r $c is faster to type and less error prone but as it is a environment variable, I can use it it a custom script. I can also imagine exporting more informations like getline(), line(), col() ... anyway: I never use <c-r><c-f> but it's worth to mention the <c-r>* during the talk. Thank you! -- Marc Chantreux ☎ 03.68.85.60.79 -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/ap-aW3-HCOwXGhX-%40prometheus.
Re: ShellCmdPre autocommand ?
hello vimmers,
A. The problem
* the use of expansions like <cfile> is very powerful but typing
those are boring and error prone ( < cfile> is a shell redir)
* sometimes it can be really usefull to have the content of <cfile>
as an exported variable.
* environment variables have autocompletion, vim expansions doesn't
:r!dpkg -r <cfile>
B. The solutions
There are many but I came to the idea that the most reusable feature
would be the ShellCmdPre autocommand (ShellCmdPost already exists).
I have no time to dive into vim developpement but if needed, I'll be
happy to sponsor it (I think Christian Brabandt asked for financial help
so he can spend more time on vim)
thanks for any feedbacks.
C. The context
In few months, I'll give a new version of the talk "acme changed my life"
https://github.com/eiro/talk-acme-changed-my-life in which I explain
that "!" by far the most underated feature of vi and all its clone and
the basics of it.
In this new version, I'll instist on another underated features: vim
expansions with expressions like
:e <cfile>/README
:r!dpkg -r <cfile>
and the way it can interact with features outside of vim. as exemple:
if you have suffix aliases set up in your ~/.zlogin, you can just type
:!<cfile>
to open a file. you can possibly map it to something like <space>x as
it's really generic.
but there the problem I mentionned before and what I really would like
is to introduce something like
au ShellCmdPre {
$f = expand('<cfile>')
$F = expand('<cFILE>')
$w = expand('<cword>')
$W = expand('<cWORD>')
}
so now I just need to type
:!$f
--
Marc Chantreux
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/ffcfb07a-ff6c-402c-aaf8-839bae034effn%40googlegroups.com.
Sunday, September 6, 2026
ShellCmdPre autocommand ?
hello vimmers, A. The problem * the use of expansions like <cfile> is very powerful but typing those are boring and error prone ( < cfile> is a shell redir) * sometimes it can be really usefull to have the content of <cfile> as an exported variable. * environment variables have autocompletion, vim expansions doesn't :r!dpkg -r <cfile> B. The solutions There are many but I came to the idea that the most reusable feature would be the ShellCmdPre autocommand (ShellCmdPost already exists). I have no time to dive into vim developpement but if needed, I'll be happy to sponsor it (I think Christian Brabandt asked for financial help so he can spend more time on vim) thanks for any feedbacks. C. The context In few months, I'll give a new version of the talk "acme changed my life" https://github.com/eiro/talk-acme-changed-my-life in which I explain that "!" by far the most underated feature of vi and all its clone and the basics of it. In this new version, I'll instist on another underated features: vim expansions with expressions like :e <cfile>/README :r!dpkg -r <cfile> and the way it can interact with features outside of vim. as exemple: if you have suffix aliases set up in your ~/.zlogin, you can just type :!<cfile> to open a file. you can possibly map it to something like <space>x as it's really generic. but there the problem I mentionned before and what I really would like is to introduce something like au ShellCmdPre { $f = expand('<cfile>') $F = expand('<cFILE>') $w = expand('<cword>') $W = expand('<cWORD>') } so now I just need to type :!$f -- Marc Chantreux -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/ap1BfcqicUzqw5IA%40prometheus.
Saturday, September 5, 2026
[ANN] vimls-go 0.1.0: a language server for Vim script and Vim9 script
I've released version 0.1.0 of vimls-go, an open-source language server written in Go for legacy Vim script and Vim9 script.
Source and setup instructions:
https://github.com/neoclide/vimls-go
Prebuilt binaries:
https://github.com/neoclide/vimls-go/releases/tag/v0.1.0
The server provides completion, hover documentation, signature help, definitions, references, diagnostics, semantic highlighting, and rename support. It includes cross-file analysis for autoload functions and Vim9 imports.
It also indexes Vim files on runtimepath and extracts documentation from doc/*.txt. Hover can show installed plugin help for variables, functions, and commands, with the source file path and line number. Runtimepath changes are handled incrementally.
In Vim, it can be used with an LSP client such as coc.nvim or vim-lsp. The server is a standalone binary; the README includes client configuration examples.
This is the first release. Formatting currently focuses on indentation, and static analysis has limitations around execute and dynamically generated names. Feedback from people working on Vim scripts and Vim9 plugins would be very helpful, especially small reproductions of false diagnostics or missing completions.
Thanks,
Qiming (chemzqm) --
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/9ffbd0cd-2fa0-4e25-83c3-d6bd2497ef10n%40googlegroups.com.
Friday, September 4, 2026
Re: $VIMRC over .vimrc ?
$MYVIMDIR is set to the last `runtimepath=` appended/set, so if you try to do oldschool plugin loading this can change it.
This is covered in :help VIMINIT but often missed.
On Friday, March 20, 2026 at 10:58:21 AM UTC-4 D. Ben Knoble wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 9:58 AM Christopher <crestchr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, March 19, 2026 at 8:44:22 PM UTC-4 Marvin Renich wrote:
>
> * Christopher <crestchr...@gmail.com> [260319 19:14]:
> > On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 9:45 AM Marvin Renich <mr...@renich.org> wrote:
> > > The user's vimrc file _must_ be one of the files listed above, unless
> > > you specify the -u option. The only way to specify the vimrc file in an
> > > environment variable is to export VIMINT="source /path/to/your/vimrc"
> > > before (or while) starting vim.
> >
> > You mention, the only way to specify a vimrc in a environment variable; I
> > assume as in $MYVIMRC is to export VIMNT which is the source of your vimrc
> > file. If my vimrc file was located in the system path then that would be;
> > VIMINT=`/etc/vimrc and that would create the environment variable $MYVIMRC
> > ?
>
> You need to read carefully and for exact syntax and content:
>
> > > environment variable is to export VIMINT="source /path/to/your/vimrc"
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Remember that VIMINIT specifies an ex command to execute, not a file
> name. If you want to source a file using VIMINIT, you must specify the
> source command itself, not just the file name.
>
> Also, when testing this, know that :scriptnames is your friend.
>
> Also note that if your vimrc file is the system vimrc file (/etc/vimrc
> on some distributions, /etc/vim/vimrc on Debian), it is sufficient to
> use:
>
> VIMINIT=':' vim
>
> or
>
> export VIMINIT=':'
> vim
>
> as the system vimrc is sourced even if you specify a VIMINIT. Setting
> VIMINIT=':' simply disables reading of the user vimrc file, but not the
> system vimrc file. (':' is an empty ex command.)
>
> Finally, if you specify VIMINIT, MYVIMRC is _not_ set by vim.
>
> ...Marvin
>
>
> What do you mean by :scriptnames ?
":scriptnames" is an Ex command supported by Vim that announces what
scripts have been executed in the current session. (":help
:scriptnames").
> Within vim I run the command; VIMIT=: (colon) and that takes my system vimrc assigns it the variable $MYVIMRC or that has to be done after ?
I get the sense you may not be reading very carefully, but let me try
to clear up some confusion:
- "VIMINIT=: vim" is an example shell command that would disable
initializations from vimrc files other than the system vimrc.
(Notably, this does _not_ disable user-local plugins.)
- Vim will assign MYVIMRC if and when it finds and executes a user
vimrc. It never (AFAIK) assigns MYVIMRC to the path of the system
vimrc.
- The above point is moot if you set VIMINIT; then nothing sets MYVIMRC
- MYVIMRC is never _read_ by Vim to take any action (unless a plugin
or script uses it)
I wanted to clarify that it's now clear. In order to use the environment variable $MYVIMRC you must have a user; .vimrc file created, typically at the $HOME path for the installed nix version.
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/120999f4-42cf-4cc2-ab1b-b0a1200f157bn%40googlegroups.com.
Thursday, August 13, 2026
Re: Vim installer for Windows is 3 weeks old
--
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.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/7d09d304-1446-4b74-b2be-377c86385457n%40googlegroups.com.
Tuesday, August 11, 2026
Algol 68 - was AW: AW: Synchronize syntax highlighting
I'll answer your question but suggest to continue this topic in Usenet (comp.lang.misc) if you're interested in more details. Von: vim_use@googlegroups.com <vim_use@googlegroups.com> im Auftrag von arocker@Vex.Net <arocker@Vex.Net> Gesendet: Dienstag, 11. August 2026 21:07 An: vim_use@googlegroups.com > I'm curious to know why anyone is editing Algol 68 code in 2026. Simply; I'm *editing* it because I am _writing programs_ in Algol 68. The question was probably meant as why one would write programs in an old (legacy) language like Algol 68. - The answer is not simple. In the past 50 years I've programmed in a lot of languages, Algol 68 was amongst the cleanest, yet very powerful, and safe! It was not my first and certainly not my last language, but other languages with all these properties were long rare, even non-existing. When I found a high-quality Algol 68 interpreter lately I was glad to refresh my old programming skills in a language that was by far more enjoyable to program in than, say, in "C" (or similar), or in one of the many more languages (that are sometimes even hyped, for reasons beyond me). > Are there even functioning compilers available any more? The "Genie" compiler "a68g" is the one that I found, and used since then. It's of very high quality (as I said), and effectively a "complete" implementation of that very large language. In addition it has quite some powerful extensions (for math, plotting, databases, functions and methods we know Unix systems, etc.). I think it was developed in the 1990's and made public (with source code) for free use in the late 1990's (IIRC). A 700-pages PDF documentation comes with it. It is still maintained by its original author, Marcel van der Veer, and releases are still published. In addition there's a much more recent GNU project to release an Algol 68 compiler, "ga68", as part of the GNU Compiler Collection. It's probably too fresh - maybe even incomplete, can't tell - to say anything about it. But its recent development is an indication that there seems to be still some interest in the Algol 68 language. The Vim syntax file is a small contribution to support that interest. Janis -- -- 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. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/AS2SPRMB0054D02866ECB10097A6AB8EF3DD2%40AS2SPRMB0054.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com.
New privacy settings for Search services and Google Play
|
Urgent: Sign in to your Google Account if you want to keep it
|
|||||
