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

53730Re: [PATCH] support for the bang in :diffthis (was Re: [PATCH] :diffoff should not change settings for non-diff windows)

Expand Messages
  • Andy Wokula
    Mar 8 10:32 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Markus Heidelberg schrieb:
      > Bram Moolenaar, 08.03.2009:
      >> Markus Heidelberg wrote:
      >>> Bram Moolenaar, 06.03.2009:
      >>>> Markus Heidelberg wrote:
      >>>>> Lech Lorens, 05.03.2009:
      >>>>>> Perfectly fine with me - I hardly ever use :diffoff without !, anyway.
      >>>>> Is there a reason to not support the corresponding :diffthis! command?
      >>>>> For consistency it seems like a good idea, instead of using two
      >>>>> different ways ":windo diffthis" and ":diffoff!". Furthermore :windo can
      >>>>> move the cursor into another window, which is normally not desired.
      >>>>> --- >8 ---
      >>>>> Add support for :diffthis! for setting the diffmode in all windows in
      >>>>> the current tab page.
      >>>> Makes sense. But it should skip "special" windows: help, quickfix,
      >>>> preview, etc.
      >>> Sure, will do.
      >>> What do you think, should the :diffthis! command set a special window
      >>> into diffmode, if it is the current window or should it never adjust
      >>> special windows?
      >>> I guess the former solution would be more consistent, since :diffthis
      >>> sets the current window into diffmode regardless of it being a special
      >>> window or not.
      >> Yes, if you do :diffthis or :diffthis! then the current window should
      >> always go to diff mode. But ":diffthis!" should only include other
      >> windows that are "normal" to avoid trouble.
      >> It's perhaps a bit strange to use ":diffthis!" to start diff mode in
      >> other windows.
      > That's for sure!
      >> ":diffall" would be more obvious. It's not symmetric
      >> with ":diffoff" vs ":diffoff!", but that one doesn't say "this".
      >> What do you all think about using ":diffall" instead?
      > Or what about :diffon[!] ?
      > :diffon would be a synonym for :diffthis then and there would be
      > symmetry with :diffoff[!] in terms of invocation and spelling.
      > Maybe this could be declared as the preferred method then.
      > Indeed I already wondered, why it was called :diffthis instead of
      > :diffon, since there was a :diffoff. And then I read that :diffoff was
      > introduced a major version later than :diffthis. I guess if they were
      > introduced at the same time, it wouldn't have been called :diffthis.
      > Markus

      I'd prefer ":diffall" over ":diffon!":

      When there are three commands for diffing, it will be clearer what
      ":diffall" means.

      Later ":diffall!" can be added to really include all windows in the

      ":diffon!" and ":diffoff!" wouldn't be exact opposites: if other windows
      are special, ":diffoff!" may include them, unlike ":diffon!".


      You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
      For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic