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

Re: Regex \%V question

Expand Messages
  • Christian Brabandt
    Hi Benjamin! (re-posting to vim-dev, for clarity). ... I think, I understand this part. This part boils down to a visual selection item followed by zero or
    Message 1 of 12 , Nov 8, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Benjamin!

      (re-posting to vim-dev, for clarity).

      On Fr, 05 Nov 2010, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:

      > I still don't quite understand why my attempted solution to rameo's
      > problem didn't work... As a pared down example, why is the entire
      > visual range matched in this:
      >
      > x = outside visual block, V = nonspaces in visual, ' ' = space in visual
      >
      > /\%V\%(\S\+\s*\)*\%V
      >
      > xxxxx VVV VVV VVV xxxxx - text
      > mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm - match
      > xxxxx VVV xxxxx - text
      > mmmmmmm - match
      >
      > I don't understand how the leading spaces in the visual range can be
      > matched by a pattern that can't match leading spaces.

      I think, I understand this part. This part boils down to a visual
      selection item followed by zero or more of a sequence of any number of
      non-space items followed by zero or more space. In other words, this can
      match /\%V\%V and in fact that is what it matches.

      > Removing the optionality, it's also weird, as the trailing space
      > (singular!?) isn't matched:
      >
      > /\%V\S\+\s*\%V
      > xxxxx VVV VVV VVV xxxxx - text
      > mmmmmmmmmmmm - match
      > xxxxx VVV xxxxx - text
      > mmmm - match
      >
      > Can anyone shed some light on this?

      This is a bug. The regular expression engine is quite complex in Vim. I
      think, the attached patch fixes it.

      regards,
      Christian

      --
      You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
    • Benjamin R. Haskell
      ... Ah! Thank you. I finally see now. I was thrown by the fact that hlsearch hilights the character following a zero-width match. (So, the highlight wasn t
      Message 2 of 12 , Nov 8, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Christian Brabandt wrote:

        > Hi Benjamin!
        >
        > (re-posting to vim-dev, for clarity).
        >
        > On Fr, 05 Nov 2010, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
        >
        >> I still don't quite understand why my attempted solution to rameo's
        >> problem didn't work... As a pared down example, why is the entire
        >> visual range matched in this:
        >>
        >> x = outside visual block, V = nonspaces in visual, ' ' = space in visual
        >>
        >> /\%V\%(\S\+\s*\)*\%V
        >>
        >> xxxxx VVV VVV VVV xxxxx - text
        >> mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm - match
        >> xxxxx VVV xxxxx - text
        >> mmmmmmm - match
        >>
        >> I don't understand how the leading spaces in the visual range can be
        >> matched by a pattern that can't match leading spaces.
        >
        > I think, I understand this part. This part boils down to a visual
        > selection item followed by zero or more of a sequence of any number of
        > non-space items followed by zero or more space. In other words, this
        > can match /\%V\%V and in fact that is what it matches.

        Ah! Thank you. I finally see now. I was thrown by the fact that
        hlsearch hilights the character following a zero-width match. (So, the
        highlight wasn't indicating a single match of the entire string; it was
        indicating three matches: one for each leading space where \%V\%V was
        matched, and the last for the runs of non-space+ space* within the
        visual range.)


        >> Removing the optionality, it's also weird, as the trailing space
        >> (singular!?) isn't matched:
        >>
        >> /\%V\S\+\s*\%V
        >> xxxxx VVV VVV VVV xxxxx - text
        >> mmmmmmmmmmmm - match
        >> xxxxx VVV xxxxx - text
        >> mmmm - match
        >>
        >> Can anyone shed some light on this?
        >
        > This is a bug. The regular expression engine is quite complex in Vim.
        > I think, the attached patch fixes it.
        >

        Works for me for this particular case.

        --
        Best,
        Ben

        --
        You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
      • James Vega
        ... What I see with your patch is that end of the match is including the first non-whitespace character after the end of the whitespace sequence. This means
        Message 3 of 12 , Nov 8, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Christian Brabandt <cblists@...> wrote:
          > On Fr, 05 Nov 2010, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
          >> Removing the optionality, it's also weird, as the trailing space
          >> (singular!?) isn't matched:
          >>
          >> /\%V\S\+\s*\%V
          >> xxxxx  VVV VVV VVV  xxxxx - text
          >>        mmmmmmmmmmmm       - match
          >> xxxxx  VVV  xxxxx - text
          >>        mmmm       - match
          >>
          >> Can anyone shed some light on this?
          > This is a bug. The regular expression engine is quite complex in Vim. I
          > think, the attached patch fixes it.

          What I see with your patch is that end of the match is including the
          first non-whitespace character after the end of the whitespace sequence.
          This means all matches other than the first start on the second
          non-whitespace character in the \S sequence and if the last
          non-whitespace sequence is only one character, the subsequent whitespace
          sequence won't be matched.

          Using the style from above (with alternating case for 'm' indicating the
          distinct matches):

          xxxxx VVV VVV V xxxx - text
          mmmmmMMMM - match

          Also, I see inconsistent highlighting with 'incsearch' enabled when the
          user has typed part of an escape sequence (e.g., '\' or '\%'). The
          highlighting for every line below some arbitrary line completely
          disappears until the escape sequence is completed. Performing a
          ":redraw!" or "/<Up>" may also trigger this.

          If this happens while typing the search string, complete the escape
          sequence, backspace to make it incomplete, complete it, etc. You'll see
          the portion of the file that's properly syntax highlighted increase
          every time you change the (in)complete status of the escape sequence.

          Not sure if it's related, but the patch also introduces this warning:

          regexp.c: In function ‘regtry’:
          regexp.c:3741: warning: comparison between pointer and integer


          --
          James
          GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James Vega <jamessan@...>

          --
          You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
        • Bram Moolenaar
          ... Thanks for making a patch. Like you say, the regular expression code is very complex. Therefore we should test as much as we can. I ve had it on my todo
          Message 4 of 12 , Nov 10, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Christian Brabandt wrote:

            > Hi Benjamin!
            >
            > (re-posting to vim-dev, for clarity).
            >
            > On Fr, 05 Nov 2010, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
            >
            > > I still don't quite understand why my attempted solution to rameo's
            > > problem didn't work... As a pared down example, why is the entire
            > > visual range matched in this:
            > >
            > > x = outside visual block, V = nonspaces in visual, ' ' = space in visual
            > >
            > > /\%V\%(\S\+\s*\)*\%V
            > >
            > > xxxxx VVV VVV VVV xxxxx - text
            > > mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm - match
            > > xxxxx VVV xxxxx - text
            > > mmmmmmm - match
            > >
            > > I don't understand how the leading spaces in the visual range can be
            > > matched by a pattern that can't match leading spaces.
            >
            > I think, I understand this part. This part boils down to a visual
            > selection item followed by zero or more of a sequence of any number of
            > non-space items followed by zero or more space. In other words, this can
            > match /\%V\%V and in fact that is what it matches.
            >
            > > Removing the optionality, it's also weird, as the trailing space
            > > (singular!?) isn't matched:
            > >
            > > /\%V\S\+\s*\%V
            > > xxxxx VVV VVV VVV xxxxx - text
            > > mmmmmmmmmmmm - match
            > > xxxxx VVV xxxxx - text
            > > mmmm - match
            > >
            > > Can anyone shed some light on this?
            >
            > This is a bug. The regular expression engine is quite complex in Vim. I
            > think, the attached patch fixes it.

            Thanks for making a patch.

            Like you say, the regular expression code is very complex. Therefore we
            should test as much as we can. I've had it on my todo list to add many
            tests for the regexp engine, but nothing much got done yet. This is
            also needed to switch to the faster regexp engine that's available.

            Can you at least add a test for this specific issue?


            --
            BRIDGEKEEPER: What is your favorite colour?
            LAUNCELOT: Blue.
            BRIDGEKEEPER: Right. Off you go.
            "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY) PICTURES LTD

            /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
            /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
            \\\ download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org ///
            \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///

            --
            You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
          • Christian Brabandt
            ... Well, as James pointed out, it s not the correct way to fix it. I haven t found a proper way to fix it. ... Sure, but first this issue needs to be fixed
            Message 5 of 12 , Nov 10, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              On Wed, November 10, 2010 12:45 pm, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
              > Christian Brabandt wrote:
              >> On Fr, 05 Nov 2010, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
              >> > I still don't quite understand why my attempted solution to rameo's
              >> > problem didn't work... As a pared down example, why is the entire
              >> > visual range matched in this:
              >> >
              >> > x = outside visual block, V = nonspaces in visual, ' ' = space in
              >> visual
              >> >
              >> > /\%V\%(\S\+\s*\)*\%V
              >> >
              >> > xxxxx VVV VVV VVV xxxxx - text
              >> > mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm - match
              >> > xxxxx VVV xxxxx - text
              >> > mmmmmmm - match
              >> >
              >> > I don't understand how the leading spaces in the visual range can be
              >> > matched by a pattern that can't match leading spaces.
              >>
              >> I think, I understand this part. This part boils down to a visual
              >> selection item followed by zero or more of a sequence of any number of
              >> non-space items followed by zero or more space. In other words, this can
              >> match /\%V\%V and in fact that is what it matches.
              >>
              >> > Removing the optionality, it's also weird, as the trailing space
              >> > (singular!?) isn't matched:
              >> >
              >> > /\%V\S\+\s*\%V
              >> > xxxxx VVV VVV VVV xxxxx - text
              >> > mmmmmmmmmmmm - match
              >> > xxxxx VVV xxxxx - text
              >> > mmmm - match
              >> >
              >> > Can anyone shed some light on this?
              >>
              >> This is a bug. The regular expression engine is quite complex in Vim. I
              >> think, the attached patch fixes it.
              >
              > Thanks for making a patch.

              Well, as James pointed out, it's not the correct way to fix it.
              I haven't found a proper way to fix it.

              >
              > Like you say, the regular expression code is very complex. Therefore we
              > should test as much as we can. I've had it on my todo list to add many
              > tests for the regexp engine, but nothing much got done yet. This is
              > also needed to switch to the faster regexp engine that's available.
              >
              > Can you at least add a test for this specific issue?

              Sure, but first this issue needs to be fixed properly.

              regards,
              Christian

              --
              You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
            • Christian Brabandt
              Hi James! ... Here is another patch, including a basic test, that should address all the issues. I couldn t reproduce the highlighting problem, though. This
              Message 6 of 12 , Nov 18, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi James!

                On Mo, 08 Nov 2010, James Vega wrote:

                > On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Christian Brabandt <cblists@...> wrote:
                > > On Fr, 05 Nov 2010, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
                > >> Removing the optionality, it's also weird, as the trailing space
                > >> (singular!?) isn't matched:
                > >>
                > >> /\%V\S\+\s*\%V
                > >> xxxxx  VVV VVV VVV  xxxxx - text
                > >>        mmmmmmmmmmmm       - match
                > >> xxxxx  VVV  xxxxx - text
                > >>        mmmm       - match
                > >>
                > >> Can anyone shed some light on this?
                > > This is a bug. The regular expression engine is quite complex in Vim. I
                > > think, the attached patch fixes it.
                >
                > What I see with your patch is that end of the match is including the
                > first non-whitespace character after the end of the whitespace sequence.
                > This means all matches other than the first start on the second
                > non-whitespace character in the \S sequence and if the last
                > non-whitespace sequence is only one character, the subsequent whitespace
                > sequence won't be matched.
                >
                > Using the style from above (with alternating case for 'm' indicating the
                > distinct matches):
                >
                > xxxxx VVV VVV V xxxx - text
                > mmmmmMMMM - match
                >
                > Also, I see inconsistent highlighting with 'incsearch' enabled when the
                > user has typed part of an escape sequence (e.g., '\' or '\%'). The
                > highlighting for every line below some arbitrary line completely
                > disappears until the escape sequence is completed. Performing a
                > ":redraw!" or "/<Up>" may also trigger this.
                >
                > If this happens while typing the search string, complete the escape
                > sequence, backspace to make it incomplete, complete it, etc. You'll see
                > the portion of the file that's properly syntax highlighted increase
                > every time you change the (in)complete status of the escape sequence.
                >
                > Not sure if it's related, but the patch also introduces this warning:
                >
                > regexp.c: In function ‘regtry’:
                > regexp.c:3741: warning: comparison between pointer and integer

                Here is another patch, including a basic test, that should address all
                the issues. I couldn't reproduce the highlighting problem, though. This
                seems to work ok for me now for the test cases I could imagine.

                regards,
                Christian

                --
                You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
              • James Vega
                ... This does seem to work better. I m still seeing the highlighting corruption with set hls is . I seem to have found another problem the patch introduces,
                Message 7 of 12 , Nov 22, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Christian Brabandt <cblists@...> wrote:
                  > Hi James!
                  >
                  > On Mo, 08 Nov 2010, James Vega wrote:
                  >
                  >> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Christian Brabandt <cblists@...> wrote:
                  >> > On Fr, 05 Nov 2010, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
                  >> >> Removing the optionality, it's also weird, as the trailing space
                  >> >> (singular!?) isn't matched:
                  >> >>
                  >> >> /\%V\S\+\s*\%V
                  >> >> xxxxx  VVV VVV VVV  xxxxx - text
                  >> >>        mmmmmmmmmmmm       - match
                  >> >> xxxxx  VVV  xxxxx - text
                  >> >>        mmmm       - match
                  >> >>
                  >> >> Can anyone shed some light on this?
                  >> > This is a bug. The regular expression engine is quite complex in Vim. I
                  >> > think, the attached patch fixes it.
                  >>
                  >> What I see with your patch is that end of the match is including the
                  >> first non-whitespace character after the end of the whitespace sequence.
                  >> This means all matches other than the first start on the second
                  >> non-whitespace character in the \S sequence and if the last
                  >> non-whitespace sequence is only one character, the subsequent whitespace
                  >> sequence won't be matched.
                  >>
                  >> Using the style from above (with alternating case for 'm' indicating the
                  >> distinct matches):
                  >>
                  >>   xxxxx  VVV VVV V  xxxx - text
                  >>          mmmmmMMMM       - match
                  >>
                  >> Also, I see inconsistent highlighting with 'incsearch' enabled when the
                  >> user has typed part of an escape sequence (e.g., '\' or '\%').  The
                  >> highlighting for every line below some arbitrary line completely
                  >> disappears until the escape sequence is completed.  Performing a
                  >> ":redraw!" or "/<Up>" may also trigger this.
                  >>
                  >> If this happens while typing the search string, complete the escape
                  >> sequence, backspace to make it incomplete, complete it, etc.  You'll see
                  >> the portion of the file that's properly syntax highlighted increase
                  >> every time you change the (in)complete status of the escape sequence.
                  >>
                  >> Not sure if it's related, but the patch also introduces this warning:
                  >>
                  >>   regexp.c: In function ‘regtry’:
                  >>   regexp.c:3741: warning: comparison between pointer and integer
                  >
                  > Here is another patch, including a basic test, that should address all
                  > the issues. I couldn't reproduce the highlighting problem, though. This
                  > seems to work ok for me now for the test cases I could imagine.

                  This does seem to work better. I'm still seeing the highlighting
                  corruption with "set hls is". I seem to have found another problem the
                  patch introduces, though, as well as one that exists without the patch.

                  Here's the introduced problem:

                  $ printf "foo\nbar\n" > testfile
                  $ vim -u NONE -N --cmd 'set hls' testfile
                  " Set the visual block to contain both lines and place the cursor
                  " just after 'bar' on the second line
                  <C-v>j$<Esc>
                  " Search for the test pattern, note that the cursor doesn't move off
                  " the r
                  /\%V\S\+\s*\%V
                  " Attempt to jump to the next match of the pattern, cursor still
                  " doesn't move
                  n

                  For some reason, with the patch the r is trapping the cursor. If you
                  move the cursor to the start of the file, and use n to cycle through the
                  matches, you'll correctly land on the 'f' and 'b' and then jump to the
                  'r' and get stuck there. If you cycle backwards with N, the cursor
                  won't get stuck but it does see the 'r' as a valid match.

                  As for the existing problem that I discovered, use the same test file.
                  Visually select only the foo line and perform the search. Now visually
                  select only the bar line. Both foo and bar will be highlighted until a
                  redraw is forced (via either <C-l> or :redraw!).

                  --
                  James
                  GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James Vega <jamessan@...>

                  --
                  You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
                • James Vega
                  ... The patch also seems to break test24 and test71. ../vim -u unix.vim -U NONE --noplugin -s dotest.in test24.in 21,22c21,22
                  Message 8 of 12 , Nov 22, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:09 PM, James Vega <jamessan@...> wrote:
                    > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Christian Brabandt <cblists@...> wrote:
                    >> Here is another patch, including a basic test, that should address all
                    >> the issues. I couldn't reproduce the highlighting problem, though. This
                    >> seems to work ok for me now for the test cases I could imagine.
                    >
                    > This does seem to work better. I'm still seeing the highlighting
                    > corruption with "set hls is".  I seem to have found another problem the
                    > patch introduces, though, as well as one that exists without the patch.

                    The patch also seems to break test24 and test71.

                    ../vim -u unix.vim -U NONE --noplugin -s dotest.in test24.in
                    21,22c21,22
                    < x aaaaa xx a
                    < x aaaaa xx a
                    ---
                    > xx aaaaa xx a
                    > xx aaaaa xx a

                    ../vim -u unix.vim -U NONE --noplugin -s dotest.in test71.in
                    4,6c4,6
                    < OK 1234567890123456789012345678901234567
                    < OK ine 2 foo bar blah
                    < OK ine 3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                    ---
                    > OK 01234567890123456789012345678901234567
                    > OK line 2 foo bar blah
                    > OK line 3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

                    --
                    James
                    GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James Vega <jamessan@...>

                    --
                    You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
                  • Bram Moolenaar
                    ... Christian, did you do any more work on this patch? -- Sometimes you can protect millions of dollars in your budget simply by buying a bag of cookies,
                    Message 9 of 12 , Dec 2, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      James Vega wrote:

                      > On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:09 PM, James Vega <jamessan@...> wrote:
                      > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Christian Brabandt <cblists@...> wrote:
                      > >> Here is another patch, including a basic test, that should address all
                      > >> the issues. I couldn't reproduce the highlighting problem, though. This
                      > >> seems to work ok for me now for the test cases I could imagine.
                      > >
                      > > This does seem to work better. I'm still seeing the highlighting
                      > > corruption with "set hls is".  I seem to have found another problem the
                      > > patch introduces, though, as well as one that exists without the patch.
                      >
                      > The patch also seems to break test24 and test71.
                      >
                      > ../vim -u unix.vim -U NONE --noplugin -s dotest.in test24.in
                      > 21,22c21,22
                      > < x aaaaa xx a
                      > < x aaaaa xx a
                      > ---
                      > > xx aaaaa xx a
                      > > xx aaaaa xx a
                      >
                      > ../vim -u unix.vim -U NONE --noplugin -s dotest.in test71.in
                      > 4,6c4,6
                      > < OK 1234567890123456789012345678901234567
                      > < OK ine 2 foo bar blah
                      > < OK ine 3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                      > ---
                      > > OK 01234567890123456789012345678901234567
                      > > OK line 2 foo bar blah
                      > > OK line 3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

                      Christian, did you do any more work on this patch?

                      --
                      Sometimes you can protect millions of dollars in your budget simply by buying
                      a bag of cookies, dropping it on the budget anylyst's desk, and saying
                      something deeply personal such as "How was your weekend, big guy?"
                      (Scott Adams - The Dilbert principle)

                      /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
                      /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
                      \\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org ///
                      \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///

                      --
                      You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
                    • Christian Brabandt
                      ... (There is another problem. Take a word, say test , visually select it and then search for %Vtest %V. It won t match, because %V needs to match at the
                      Message 10 of 12 , Dec 2, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Thu, December 2, 2010 5:13 pm, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
                        > Christian, did you do any more work on this patch?

                        (There is another problem. Take a word, say "test", visually select
                        it and then search for \%Vtest\%V. It won't match, because \%V
                        needs to match at the same cell as the t. And this doesn't work.

                        Effectively, \%V needs to match after the last column of the visually
                        selected region. But then, 'hls' will be off by one cell, which isn't
                        right either.)

                        So, no I didn't work on this anymore because I am too scared of the RE
                        code ;(

                        regards,
                        Christian

                        --
                        You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
                      • Bram Moolenaar
                        ... Any progress? Anyone wants to dive into this? Or should we abandon this patch? -- Over the years, I ve developed my sense of deja vu so acutely that now I
                        Message 11 of 12 , Dec 30, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Christian Brabandt wrote:

                          > On Thu, December 2, 2010 5:13 pm, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
                          > > Christian, did you do any more work on this patch?
                          >
                          > (There is another problem. Take a word, say "test", visually select
                          > it and then search for \%Vtest\%V. It won't match, because \%V
                          > needs to match at the same cell as the t. And this doesn't work.
                          >
                          > Effectively, \%V needs to match after the last column of the visually
                          > selected region. But then, 'hls' will be off by one cell, which isn't
                          > right either.)
                          >
                          > So, no I didn't work on this anymore because I am too scared of the RE
                          > code ;(

                          Any progress? Anyone wants to dive into this?
                          Or should we abandon this patch?

                          --
                          Over the years, I've developed my sense of deja vu so acutely that now
                          I can remember things that *have* happened before ...

                          /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
                          /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
                          \\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org ///
                          \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///

                          --
                          You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
                        • Christian Brabandt
                          Hi Bram! ... The reason for posting other patches has been, that I haven t found a good way to fix this issue and haven t look into this since then. I ll look
                          Message 12 of 12 , Dec 30, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hi Bram!

                            On Do, 30 Dez 2010, Bram Moolenaar wrote:

                            > Any progress? Anyone wants to dive into this?
                            > Or should we abandon this patch?

                            The reason for posting other patches has been, that I haven't found a
                            good way to fix this issue and haven't look into this since then. I'll
                            look into this again in the current spare time. But I am not too
                            optimistic.

                            regards,
                            Christian

                            --
                            You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.