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

Re: a few bugs with gvim-7.

Expand Messages
  • Bram Moolenaar
    ... I think there are people who do. You can use underline for syntax highlighting. Then undercurl is still available for badly spelled words on top of that.
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 3 2:25 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Gautam Iyer wrote:

      > On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 12:15:32PM +0200, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
      >
      > > > Ok, so I *finally* loaded the gui version of vim and found the following
      > > > bugs with syntax highlighting:
      > > >
      > > > 1. The guisp only seems to work with gui=undercurl and not with
      > > > gui=underline (the undercurl gives a nice MS Word look ... but
      > > > since I hate MS, I tried to repalce it with underline naturally
      > > > and found the above error).
      > >
      > > That's right, underline didn't change, it uses the guifg color.
      > > Perhaps we can use another attribute for underlining with the guisp
      > > color. Can't think of a good name right now.
      >
      > Why not use guisp? I don't think anyone will want to use BOTH underline
      > and undercurl will they?

      I think there are people who do. You can use underline for syntax
      highlighting. Then undercurl is still available for badly spelled
      words on top of that. If you don't want to use undercurl, then perhaps
      overwriting the underline in a different color would be OK.

      If we would use guisp for underline then there would at least be the
      fallback that when it's not set guifg must be used, otherwise it's not
      backward compatible. And then when there is a spell error an existing
      underline would suddenly change color when the undercurl appears.

      > Anyway, if you do plan on using a different name, might I suggest
      > 'guiuc' (for undercurl) and 'guiul' for underline :)

      I was thinking of another name for "underline" that does use the guisp
      color. I don't really want to add more color arguments, it's a bit
      bulky in the code.

      --
      The startling truth finally became apparent, and it was this: Numbers
      written on restaurant checks within the confines of restaurants do not follow
      the same mathematical laws as numbers written on any other pieces of paper in
      any other parts of the Universe. This single statement took the scientific
      world by storm. So many mathematical conferences got held in such good
      restaurants that many of the finest minds of a generation died of obesity and
      heart failure, and the science of mathematics was put back by years.
      -- Douglas Adams, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"

      /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
      /// Sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
      \\\ Project leader for A-A-P -- http://www.A-A-P.org ///
      \\\ Buy LOTR 3 and help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF.nl/lotr.html ///
    • GI
      ... Ok. I messed up on this one. However I now have another problem -- I find that pressing Ctrl-W in the command line deletes a word as defined by iskeyword
      Message 2 of 6 , Jun 3 2:38 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 12:15:32PM +0200, Bram Moolenaar wrote:

        > > (unrelated) Ctrl-W works differently in gvim7 command line. In a
        > > buffer in insert mode, ctrl-w deletes a word. But in gvim in the
        > > command line ctrl-W deletes a blank delimited word. (I know in
        > > vim6.3.x ctrl-W deletes a word in command line, but have not yet
        > > compiled the GUI on this computer so don't know what the GUI does).
        >
        > I don't think this changed from previous versions. It's very well
        > possible that CTRL-W works different on the command line compared to
        > Insert mode.

        Ok. I messed up on this one. However I now have another problem -- I
        find that pressing Ctrl-W in the command line deletes a word as defined
        by iskeyword from the current buffer. (Everytime I tried in gvim7, I was
        viewing a help file, hence blank delmited words got deleted on pressing
        Ctrl-W).

        I'm wondering if the above is what was intended or not. To me it seems
        more intuitive if Ctrl-W worked the same always (as opposed to deleting
        too much when viewing a help file). But ofcourse you and others might
        feel differently ... :)

        GI

        --
        Alternative definitions of terms from Math Lectures:
        TRIVIAL: If I have to show you how to do this, you're in the wrong
        class.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.