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

Re: Jump within function

Expand Messages
  • Tim Chase
    ... for the lazy ones in the crowd like myself, it seems to work fine without the trailing slash. that one extra character can be a drag ;-) This even has
    Message 1 of 10 , Oct 31, 2002
      > The most straightforward (but much too often overlooked, sadly) way to
      > do this is just putting what you want as an Ex line address:
      >
      > 0;/^>/

      for the lazy ones in the crowd like myself, it seems to work fine without
      the trailing slash. that one extra character can be a drag ;-) This even
      has the nice advantage that it catches a > as the first character in a
      file. Using gg/^> won't find that. (okay, so what you really need to do
      for that one is to have search-wrapping on, and G$/^> to find the first
      one in the file)

      -tim
    • kbosau@web.de
      ... Hi Tim, thanks for the explanation! I m a member this crowd too, so I simply added normal G$/^ to the function body and it turned out to work fine now.
      Message 2 of 10 , Nov 1, 2002
        On 31 Oct 2002 at 16:00, Tim Chase wrote:

        > > The most straightforward (but much too often overlooked, sadly) way to
        > > do this is just putting what you want as an Ex line address:
        > >
        > > 0;/^>/
        >
        > for the lazy ones in the crowd like myself, it seems to work fine without
        > the trailing slash. that one extra character can be a drag ;-) This even
        > has the nice advantage that it catches a > as the first character in a
        > file. Using gg/^> won't find that. (okay, so what you really need to do
        > for that one is to have search-wrapping on, and G$/^> to find the first
        > one in the file)

        Hi Tim, thanks for the explanation! I'm a member this crowd too, so I
        simply added "normal G$/^>" to the function body and it turned out to
        work fine now. Just one question: "search-wrapping"... What do I have
        to do to turn this feature on?

        Klaus
      • Piet Delport
        ... If it works, like you said, then you already have it on, but the relevant setting is wrapscan . I really urge you to reconsider and use the 0;/^ / method,
        Message 3 of 10 , Nov 1, 2002
          On Sat, 02 Nov 2002 at 04:52:30 +0100, kbosau@... wrote:
          > On 31 Oct 2002 at 16:00, Tim Chase wrote:
          >
          >>> The most straightforward (but much too often overlooked, sadly) way to
          >>> do this is just putting what you want as an Ex line address:
          >>>
          >>> 0;/^>/
          >>
          >> for the lazy ones in the crowd like myself, it seems to work fine without
          >> the trailing slash. that one extra character can be a drag ;-) This even
          >> has the nice advantage that it catches a > as the first character in a
          >> file. Using gg/^> won't find that. (okay, so what you really need to do
          >> for that one is to have search-wrapping on, and G$/^> to find the first
          >> one in the file)
          >
          > Hi Tim, thanks for the explanation! I'm a member this crowd too, so I
          > simply added "normal G$/^>" to the function body and it turned out to
          > work fine now. Just one question: "search-wrapping"... What do I have
          > to do to turn this feature on?

          If it works, like you said, then you already have it on, but the
          relevant setting is 'wrapscan'.

          I really urge you to reconsider and use the 0;/^>/ method, though. It's
          shorter, simpler, doesn't depend on 'wrapscan' being on, and will work
          even in vanilla Vi (and/or Vim compiled without +ex_extra).

          --
          Piet Delport
          Today's subliminal thought is:
        • Gumnos (Tim Chase)
          ... The germane option is wrapscan (:he ws) Depending on where you re doing this, there are times for both the G/^ and the ex version of :0;/^ I d use the
          Message 4 of 10 , Nov 2, 2002
            > Hi Tim, thanks for the explanation! I'm a member this crowd too, so I
            > simply added "normal G$/^>" to the function body and it turned out to
            > work fine now. Just one question: "search-wrapping"... What do I have
            > to do to turn this feature on?

            The germane option is "wrapscan" (:he ws)

            Depending on where you're doing this, there are times for both the G/^> and
            the ex version of :0;/^> I'd use the former when doing it by hand (while
            editing a document), and use the latter when putting it in a script. The
            latter is also more likely faster (not that it matters much for the trivial
            few cycles of processor difference that occur), as well as shorter to type
            in a script (no need to "normal" it). IIRC, wrapscan defaults to being on
            in vim, though I'm not sure about vanilla vi's behavior in this matter. I
            first learned about the G/^> from the fabulous tutorial (that not only
            teaches the basics like many sites do, but includes a number of great tips,
            tricks, hints, and crazy stunts one can pull off in vi) found at
            http://www.networkcomputing.com/unixworld/tutorial/009/009.html

            particularly, Part 4 on the substitute command. All good stuff :) hth

            -tim
          • kbosau@web.de
            ... Hi Tim! It s really fabulous. I didn t know this site yet but I guess everybody using this editor, for whatever reasons, should know this source. Already
            Message 5 of 10 , Nov 3, 2002
              On 2 Nov 2002 at 9:20, Gumnos (Tim Chase) wrote:

              > > Hi Tim, thanks for the explanation! I'm a member this crowd too, so I
              > > simply added "normal G$/^>" to the function body and it turned out to
              > > work fine now. Just one question: "search-wrapping"... What do I have
              > > to do to turn this feature on?
              >
              > The germane option is "wrapscan" (:he ws)
              >
              > Depending on where you're doing this, there are times for both the G/^> and
              > the ex version of :0;/^> I'd use the former when doing it by hand (while
              > editing a document), and use the latter when putting it in a script. The
              > latter is also more likely faster (not that it matters much for the trivial
              > few cycles of processor difference that occur), as well as shorter to type
              > in a script (no need to "normal" it). IIRC, wrapscan defaults to being on
              > in vim, though I'm not sure about vanilla vi's behavior in this matter. I
              > first learned about the G/^> from the fabulous tutorial (that not only
              > teaches the basics like many sites do, but includes a number of great tips,
              > tricks, hints, and crazy stunts one can pull off in vi) found at
              > http://www.networkcomputing.com/unixworld/tutorial/009/009.html

              Hi Tim!

              It's really fabulous. I didn't know this site yet but I guess
              everybody using this editor, for whatever reasons, should know
              this source. Already bookmarked...

              Thanks for the hint!

              Klaus

              PS: The email extension I worked on is now ready and it turned
              out to be very comfortable. Unfortunately not every email/news-
              client offers a comfortable way to involve an external editor,
              though most of the inbuilt ones are not even able to do the
              simplest things. Pegasus for instance, a mail program with,
              definitely, the most crappy editing extension I ever saw. Try
              out and you'll start to love even "notepad"... :-) Bye!
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.