Re: sort bug?
Christian Brabandt wrote:
Hi Charles!
On Do, 14 Okt 2010, Charles Campbell wrote:
Bee wrote:
On Oct 13, 10:00 pm, Beebeeyaw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 13, 6:56 pm, Charles E Campbell Jrdrc...@campbellfamily.biz
wrote:
Bee wrote:
sort bug?
vim 7.3.27 Linux
vim 7.3.21 Mac 10.4.11
Select the lines between the rules (including the blank lines) and
sort:
','sort n
1-2-3-4-5-6
xxx yyy: 0
xxx yyy: 1
xxx yyy: 2
xxx yyy: 3
xxx yyy: 4
xxx yyy: 5
xxx yyy: 6
xxx yyy: 7
xxx yyy: 8
xxx yyy: 9
1-2-3-4-5-6
The result is:
1-2-3-4-5-6
xxx yyy: 0
xxx yyy: 1
xxx yyy: 2
xxx yyy: 3
xxx yyy: 4
xxx yyy: 5
xxx yyy: 6
xxx yyy: 7
xxx yyy: 8
xxx yyy: 9
1-2-3-4-5-6
I would expect this and it is what I get when using the shell:
','!sort -n
1-2-3-4-5-6
xxx yyy: 0
xxx yyy: 1
xxx yyy: 2
xxx yyy: 3
xxx yyy: 4
xxx yyy: 5
xxx yyy: 6
xxx yyy: 7
xxx yyy: 8
xxx yyy: 9
1-2-3-4-5-6
I tried your example and was unable to duplicate the problem. Have you
tried putting this in a file, say sort.test:
vim -u NONE -N sort.test
:%sort
I tried that, and I tried using V and selecting all the lines, and each
time I got the I would expect this... result.
Thank you, I did not think to do vim -u NONE -N and...
I then get the expected result!
That means something in my vimrc is causing the sort problem.
I will remember to do that first next time.
Oops!
I copied what you had done and that works, but that is not the case I
was using.
Try it selecting the lines and
:','sort n
Do not forget the n numeric sort option.
With [n] sorting is done on the first decimal number
in the line (after or inside a {pattern} match).
One leading '-' is included in the number.
OK, now that I'm using sort n -- I can duplicate the behavior.
Yes empty lines are considered as they would contain a zero. And in case
another line has the same number, the original order would remain. In
this case, the line with the 0 stays on top. (Really strange is the
result, if you have an empty line, followed by a line containing a zero
followed by an empty line.)
Attached patch fixes that.
Thanks. The number is a long, thus SHRT_MIN is not the smallest number.
To avoid problems with old compilers I'll use MAXLNUM made negative.
Hmm, when there are negative numbers there is another problem, I'll see
if I can fix that as well... Ah, subtracting two longs and storing the
result in an int truncates the number.
--
FIRST HEAD: All right! All right! We'll kill him first and then have tea and
biscuits.
Monty Python and the Holy Grail PYTHON (MONTY) PICTURES LTD
/// Bram Moolenaar -- b...@moolenaar.net -- 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
Re: sort bug?
Hi Charles!
On Do, 14 Okt 2010, Charles Campbell wrote:
Bee wrote:
On Oct 13, 10:00 pm, Beebeeyaw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 13, 6:56 pm, Charles E Campbell Jrdrc...@campbellfamily.biz
wrote:
Bee wrote:
sort bug?
vim 7.3.27 Linux
vim 7.3.21 Mac 10.4.11
Select the lines between the rules (including the blank lines) and
sort:
','sort n
1-2-3-4-5-6
xxx yyy: 0
xxx yyy: 1
xxx yyy: 2
xxx yyy: 3
xxx yyy: 4
xxx yyy: 5
xxx yyy: 6
xxx yyy: 7
xxx yyy: 8
xxx yyy: 9
1-2-3-4-5-6
The result is:
1-2-3-4-5-6
xxx yyy: 0
xxx yyy: 1
xxx yyy: 2
xxx yyy: 3
xxx yyy: 4
xxx yyy: 5
xxx yyy: 6
xxx yyy: 7
xxx yyy: 8
xxx yyy: 9
1-2-3-4-5-6
I would expect this and it is what I get when using the shell:
','!sort -n
1-2-3-4-5-6
xxx yyy: 0
xxx yyy: 1
xxx yyy: 2
xxx yyy: 3
xxx yyy: 4
xxx yyy: 5
xxx yyy: 6
xxx yyy: 7
xxx yyy: 8
xxx yyy: 9
1-2-3-4-5-6
I tried your example and was unable to duplicate the problem. Have you
tried putting this in a file, say sort.test:
vim -u NONE -N sort.test
:%sort
I tried that, and I tried using V and selecting all the lines, and each
time I got the I would expect this... result.
Thank you, I did not think to do vim -u NONE -N and...
I then get the expected result!
That means something in my vimrc is causing the sort problem.
I will remember to do that first next time.
Oops!
I copied what you had done and that works, but that is not the case I
was using.
Try it selecting the lines and
:','sort n
Do not forget the n numeric sort option.
With [n] sorting is done on the first decimal number
in the line (after or inside a {pattern} match).
One leading '-' is included in the number.
OK, now that I'm using sort n -- I can duplicate the behavior.
Yes empty lines are considered as they would contain a zero. And in case
another line has the same number, the original order would remain. In
this case, the line with the 0 stays on top. (Really strange is the
result, if you have an empty line, followed by a line containing a zero
followed by an empty line.)
Attached patch fixes that.
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
# HG changeset patch
# Parent b8dbee14a3d8e29383c979b5bdb59ba1d0585ddf
diff --git a/src/ex_cmds.c b/src/ex_cmds.c
--- a/src/ex_cmds.c
+++ b/src/ex_cmds.c
@@ -491,7 +491,11 @@
s = skiptodigit(p);
if (s p s[-1] == '-')
--s; /* include preceding negative sign */
- vim_str2nr(s, NULL, NULL, sort_oct, sort_hex,
+ if (*s == NUL)
+ /* empty lines should be first */
+ nrs[lnum - eap-line1].start_col_nr = SHRT_MIN;
+ else
+ vim_str2nr(s, NULL, NULL, sort_oct, sort_hex,
nrs[lnum - eap-line1].start_col_nr, NULL);
(*s2) = c;
}
sort bug?
sort bug? vim 7.3.27 Linux vim 7.3.21 Mac 10.4.11 Select the lines between the rules (including the blank lines) and sort: ','sort n 1-2-3-4-5-6 xxx yyy: 0 xxx yyy: 1 xxx yyy: 2 xxx yyy: 3 xxx yyy: 4 xxx yyy: 5 xxx yyy: 6 xxx yyy: 7 xxx yyy: 8 xxx yyy: 9 1-2-3-4-5-6 The result is: 1-2-3-4-5-6 xxx yyy: 0 xxx yyy: 1 xxx yyy: 2 xxx yyy: 3 xxx yyy: 4 xxx yyy: 5 xxx yyy: 6 xxx yyy: 7 xxx yyy: 8 xxx yyy: 9 1-2-3-4-5-6 I would expect this and it is what I get when using the shell: ','!sort -n 1-2-3-4-5-6 xxx yyy: 0 xxx yyy: 1 xxx yyy: 2 xxx yyy: 3 xxx yyy: 4 xxx yyy: 5 xxx yyy: 6 xxx yyy: 7 xxx yyy: 8 xxx yyy: 9 1-2-3-4-5-6 -- 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
Re: sort bug?
Bee wrote: sort bug? vim 7.3.27 Linux vim 7.3.21 Mac 10.4.11 Select the lines between the rules (including the blank lines) and sort: ','sort n 1-2-3-4-5-6 xxx yyy: 0 xxx yyy: 1 xxx yyy: 2 xxx yyy: 3 xxx yyy: 4 xxx yyy: 5 xxx yyy: 6 xxx yyy: 7 xxx yyy: 8 xxx yyy: 9 1-2-3-4-5-6 The result is: 1-2-3-4-5-6 xxx yyy: 0 xxx yyy: 1 xxx yyy: 2 xxx yyy: 3 xxx yyy: 4 xxx yyy: 5 xxx yyy: 6 xxx yyy: 7 xxx yyy: 8 xxx yyy: 9 1-2-3-4-5-6 I would expect this and it is what I get when using the shell: ','!sort -n 1-2-3-4-5-6 xxx yyy: 0 xxx yyy: 1 xxx yyy: 2 xxx yyy: 3 xxx yyy: 4 xxx yyy: 5 xxx yyy: 6 xxx yyy: 7 xxx yyy: 8 xxx yyy: 9 1-2-3-4-5-6 I tried your example and was unable to duplicate the problem. Have you tried putting this in a file, say sort.test: vim -u NONE -N sort.test :%sort I tried that, and I tried using V and selecting all the lines, and each time I got the I would expect this... result. Regards, Chip Campbell -- 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
Re: sort bug?
On Oct 13, 6:56 pm, Charles E Campbell Jr drc...@campbellfamily.biz wrote: Bee wrote: sort bug? vim 7.3.27 Linux vim 7.3.21 Mac 10.4.11 Select the lines between the rules (including the blank lines) and sort: ','sort n 1-2-3-4-5-6 xxx yyy: 0 xxx yyy: 1 xxx yyy: 2 xxx yyy: 3 xxx yyy: 4 xxx yyy: 5 xxx yyy: 6 xxx yyy: 7 xxx yyy: 8 xxx yyy: 9 1-2-3-4-5-6 The result is: 1-2-3-4-5-6 xxx yyy: 0 xxx yyy: 1 xxx yyy: 2 xxx yyy: 3 xxx yyy: 4 xxx yyy: 5 xxx yyy: 6 xxx yyy: 7 xxx yyy: 8 xxx yyy: 9 1-2-3-4-5-6 I would expect this and it is what I get when using the shell: ','!sort -n 1-2-3-4-5-6 xxx yyy: 0 xxx yyy: 1 xxx yyy: 2 xxx yyy: 3 xxx yyy: 4 xxx yyy: 5 xxx yyy: 6 xxx yyy: 7 xxx yyy: 8 xxx yyy: 9 1-2-3-4-5-6 I tried your example and was unable to duplicate the problem. Have you tried putting this in a file, say sort.test: vim -u NONE -N sort.test :%sort I tried that, and I tried using V and selecting all the lines, and each time I got the I would expect this... result. Thank you, I did not think to do vim -u NONE -N and... I then get the expected result! That means something in my vimrc is causing the sort problem. I will remember to do that first next time. -- 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
Re: sort bug?
On Oct 13, 10:00 pm, Bee beeyaw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 13, 6:56 pm, Charles E Campbell Jr drc...@campbellfamily.biz
wrote:
Bee wrote:
sort bug?
vim 7.3.27 Linux
vim 7.3.21 Mac 10.4.11
Select the lines between the rules (including the blank lines) and
sort:
','sort n
1-2-3-4-5-6
xxx yyy: 0
xxx yyy: 1
xxx yyy: 2
xxx yyy: 3
xxx yyy: 4
xxx yyy: 5
xxx yyy: 6
xxx yyy: 7
xxx yyy: 8
xxx yyy: 9
1-2-3-4-5-6
The result is:
1-2-3-4-5-6
xxx yyy: 0
xxx yyy: 1
xxx yyy: 2
xxx yyy: 3
xxx yyy: 4
xxx yyy: 5
xxx yyy: 6
xxx yyy: 7
xxx yyy: 8
xxx yyy: 9
1-2-3-4-5-6
I would expect this and it is what I get when using the shell:
','!sort -n
1-2-3-4-5-6
xxx yyy: 0
xxx yyy: 1
xxx yyy: 2
xxx yyy: 3
xxx yyy: 4
xxx yyy: 5
xxx yyy: 6
xxx yyy: 7
xxx yyy: 8
xxx yyy: 9
1-2-3-4-5-6
I tried your example and was unable to duplicate the problem. Have you
tried putting this in a file, say sort.test:
vim -u NONE -N sort.test
:%sort
I tried that, and I tried using V and selecting all the lines, and each
time I got the I would expect this... result.
Thank you, I did not think to do vim -u NONE -N and...
I then get the expected result!
That means something in my vimrc is causing the sort problem.
I will remember to do that first next time.
Oops!
I copied what you had done and that works, but that is not the case I
was using.
Try it selecting the lines and
:','sort n
Do not forget the n numeric sort option.
With [n] sorting is done on the first decimal number
in the line (after or inside a {pattern} match).
One leading '-' is included in the number.
--
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
