[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: move/copy question
From: |
Thomas Dickey |
Subject: |
Re: move/copy question |
Date: |
Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:51:02 -0400 |
On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 01:50:48PM +0000, david sowerby wrote:
> Thanks for the quick reply. I can live without "co" and "m", it was mostly
> curiosity on my part. Maybe the "show-commands" should have "not implemented
> yet" added? and thanks for all the work :-)
agreed. When I switch back to vile, I'll probably do that, as well as
making some notes on why it's not done -- perhaps "only" the syntax,
which would require some work to permit the address adjacent to the
command-name -- unlike all of the other commands.
>
> ==========================================
> Inertia is the most powerful force in the Universe.
>
>
> On Thursday, June 6, 2024 at 01:09:57 AM PDT, Thomas Dickey
> <dickey@his.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 05:05:30AM +0000, david sowerby wrote:
> > According to the O'Reilly book Vile doesn't have the vi 'move' command (or
> > the 'copy' one either?) But checking through Vile's "show-commands" they are
> > both described -- 'move-til' and 'copy-til'. But they don't work :-(
> > ...........or am I doing something wrong? A search in the Archives gives no
> > result. Another month another question.
>
> They are in the symbol table for completeness, but as the message says,
> not implemented. The reason for the omission is that (without a lot of
> work, of course), the vi-compatible syntax wouldn't work with the way
> vile's ":" line is parsed:
>
> + vi works by reading the whole line all at once, and picking out what
> it needs.
>
> + vile works by accepting the line in steps which allow for
> name-completion and scrolling through the history.
>
> The basic scheme of parsing in steps dates from the early 1990s.
> Later in the 1990s, I did a lot of the name-completion and
> history mechanism.
>
> While _that_ has some quirks (which I've gotten used to, and
> overlook), getting that to work well took a lot of time :-)
>
> The archives don't go back that far, of course (looks like that began in
> January 2006). Paul Fox used to run a mailing list on his machine.
> I'm not aware of an archive for that, and don't have a complete set.
>
> There was some occasional discussion of the above points, and I probably
> have some relevant mail, but digging it out would take some work :-(
>
> The code in its current form dates from 1996, with some reformatting in 2001:
>
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): /* ARGSUSED */
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): int
> 1.290 (tom 15-Mar-97): unimpl(int f GCC_UNUSED, int n GCC_UNUSED)
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): {
> 1.453 (tom 21-Aug-01): mlwarn("[Sorry, that vi command is
> unimplemented in vile ]");
> 1.453 (tom 21-Aug-01): return FALSE;
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): }
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96):
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): int
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): opercopy(int f, int n)
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): {
> 1.453 (tom 21-Aug-01): return unimpl(f, n);
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): }
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96):
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): int
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): opermove(int f, int n)
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): {
> 1.453 (tom 21-Aug-01): return unimpl(f, n);
> 1.277 (pgf 01-May-96): }
>
> but the unimpl and related functions date from 1991:
>
> REV:1.6 main.c 1991/05/31 11:12:19 pgf
>
> changed args to execute(), and
> added linespec character class, and
> added unimplemented ex functions
>
> All of this is in RCS, but I've exported stuff to git -
>
> https://invisible-island.net/personal/git-exports.html
> https://github.com/ThomasDickey/vile-snapshots
> https://github.com/ThomasDickey/pgf-vile-snapshots
>
> --
> Thomas E. Dickey <dickey@invisible-island.net>
> https://invisible-island.net
>
--
Thomas E. Dickey <dickey@invisible-island.net>
https://invisible-island.net
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature