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

Re: Does 'man' syntax do its job?

Expand Messages
  • Charles E Campbell Jr
    ... That wasn t my objection; I rather like inline folding. Also, perhaps I may not have stated Bram s objection correctly, or perhaps I misunderstood it.
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 3, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      A.J.Mechelynck wrote:

      > Charles E Campbell Jr wrote:
      > [...]
      >
      >> Unfortunately, IMHO, inline folding didn't get enough votes during
      >> vim 7.0's development, and Bram is uncomfortable with the idea of
      >> inline folding because it, naturally enough, suppresses information
      >> (Vince's patch typically folds all lines but the current one). At
      >> least, that's how I understand the state of things.
      >>
      >> Regards,
      >> Chip Campbell
      >>
      >>
      >
      > Doesn't linewise folding also suppress information? Yet Vim has had
      > that for quite some time. It is true that it doesn't make the folds
      > disappear completely; rather, each outer closed fold is replaced by
      > one line. That wouldn't work for inline folding; but maybe it could
      > use the 'foldcolumn' or something to draw attention to the fact that
      > something has been hidden.
      >
      > And BTW, the Hidden highlight group (guibg=bg guifg=bg) also
      > "suppresses" whatever uses it, yet IIUC it is used a lot in helpfiles.
      > I'm not sure about netrw, but the older Explorer plugin also used it
      > to hide its sort key.

      That wasn't my objection; I rather like inline folding. Also, perhaps I
      may not have stated Bram's objection correctly, or perhaps I
      misunderstood it. After all, he does have the following note in the
      todo.txt:

      - Add 'hidecomment' option: don't display comments in /* */ and after //.
      Or is the conceal patch from Vince Negri a more generic solution?

      Vince Negri's patch could certainly be used to hide comments but leave
      the comment start designators visible. It basically allows one to
      extend syntax highlighting to include the "conceal" option, so one can
      specify things to inline conceal.

      Vince's folding patch supports the notion of "conceallevel"; taken from
      his patch to options.txt:

      'conceallevel' Effect
      0 Text is shown normally
      1 Each block of concealed text is replaced with the
      character defined in 'listchars' (default is a dash)
      and highlighted with the "Conceal" highlight group.
      2 Concealed text is completely hidden unless it has a
      custom replacement character defined (see
      |syn-cchar|.
      3 Concealed text is completely hidden.

      Even conceallevel==3 isn't actually "completely hidden"; instead, the
      current line (the one the cursor is on and where presumably editing may
      occur) has its text shown normally (ie. no inline folding on the current
      line).

      Regards,
      Chip Campbell
    • Vince Negri
      James Vega [mailto:jamessan@jamessan.com] wrote: On the other hand, integrating the [conceal] patch would provide a solution for various itches that I know
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 4, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        James Vega [mailto:jamessan@...] wrote:

        On the other hand, integrating the [conceal] patch would provide a solution for
        various itches that I know people want to scratch (mainly to do with
        builtin previewing of filetypes like html, tex, etc). If it were
        disabled by default (as I think folding should be), it would allow
        people that knew of it to take advantage of the functionality without
        causing novice users to wonder what the heck is going on.

        FYI the default "conceallevel" is 0, at which no concealment goes on at all.

        To recap:

        0 - normal operation.

        1 - inline folding, each group of concealed chars replaced by a configurable character
        (by default this is a "-" highlighted to look similar to a folded line.

        Mode 1 is most useful for "folding out" applications, since you can always
        see that something has been removed.

        2 - hide/replace mode. Concealed chars are hidden completely, unless a character has
        been specified for them in the syntax definition. Simple example: in my own
        HTML syntax I have the "&" sequence folded and replaced with "&".

        Mode 2 is the most useful for "smart" TeX and HTML etc editing, as it has
        the cleanest look.

        3 - hide mode. Concealed chars are always hidden completely. This is only there for
        completeness, I would imagine option 2 is always the more useful.


        Vince
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.