Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

112458Re: mass delete words based on spell

Expand Messages
  • corykendall
    Mar 2, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      On Mar 2, 1:49 pm, Christian Brabandt <cbli...@...> wrote:
      > Hi corykendall!
      > Certainly not. Use whatever works best for you. I personally dislike
      > macros, because usually I have problems decrypting them. Therefore I
      > prefer ex commands and functions which I find more readable.
      > regards,
      > Christian

      On Mar 2, 9:49 am, Tim Chase <v...@...> wrote:
      > The problems I'd have with doing that are mostly "I have to think
      > about things" issues:
      > - do I have more than 1000 items and may need to re-execute the
      > macro? (having 'ruler' showing the number of lines in the file
      > might help)
      > - does "]s" break the repeated macro execution if there isn't a
      > bad-spell match, or does it continue to delete the remainder of
      > the 1000 things after the last bad-spelling is found?
      > - do I have something valuable in register "a" that I don't want
      > to tromp with my macro; or the flip side of "what register do I
      > have that's available"?
      > - if there's a bad-spell word as the first line, does issuing "k"
      > ("go up from line #1", possibly an error-ish condition) after
      > deleting it trigger the macro-recording to stop?
      > - can I issue this from anywhere in the file or do I have to do
      > it from the top (and does my 'wrapscan' setting change its behavior)?
      > That's a lot more thinking than I like to do ;-)
      > The :g or :s versions can be used in a mapping and trusted to do
      > what they should without any of the above issues (except perhaps
      > tromping the search register).
      > -tim

      Good responses both, thanks guys.

      I think I agree that if you want as repeatable solution, an ex
      expression is better because it's more readable, and rememberable.

      But if I need a one-off solution, I find it easier to record a
      macro... Fix the first occurance, navigate to the next occurance in a
      repeatable way, and then execute as many times as necessary. I also
      like that I can run a macro once... twice... three times... each time
      making sure it worked correctly, and then launch it on the whole file.

      Perhaps once I get more comfortable with regular expressions I'll
      change my tune :)

      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
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic