All,
I am trying to keep track of the number of buffers in the buffer list.
I'm doing this with the following code:
autocmd BufAdd * let g:zbuflistcount += 1
autocmd BufDelete * let g:zbuflistcount -= 1
The problem is I found this to be very unreliable in some circumstances,
and
On Sun 12-Nov-06 6:17pm -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am trying to keep track of the number of buffers in the buffer list.
>
> I'm doing this with the following code:
> autocmd BufAdd * let g:zbuflistcount += 1
> autocmd BufDelete * let g:zbuflistcount -= 1
>
> The problem is
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 07:14:49PM -0600, Bill McCarthy wrote:
> On Sun 12-Nov-06 6:17pm -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I am trying to keep track of the number of buffers in the buffer list.
> >
> > I'm doing this with the following code:
> > autocmd BufAdd * let g:zbuflistcount +=
On Sun 12-Nov-06 7:54pm -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Well I'm reporting the above "g:zbuflistcount" in my 'rulerformat'.
Don't you think you should have mentioned that?
> I really don't think I can afford the baggage of calling your function
> from within my 'rulerformat'.
No, for 100 buff
On 11/13/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All,
I am trying to keep track of the number of buffers in the buffer list.
I'm doing this with the following code:
autocmd BufAdd * let g:zbuflistcount += 1
autocmd BufDelete * let g:zbuflistcount -= 1
The problem is I
> On Sun 12-Nov-06 7:54pm -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Well I'm reporting the above "g:zbuflistcount" in my 'rulerformat'.
>
> Don't you think you should have mentioned that?
>
>> I really don't think I can afford the baggage of calling your function
>> from within my 'rulerformat'.
>
> No,
>> I'm doing this with the following code:
>> autocmd BufAdd * let g:zbuflistcount += 1
>> autocmd BufDelete * let g:zbuflistcount -= 1
>>
>> The problem is I found this to be very unreliable in some circumstances,
>> and I'm not sure why.
>
> One thing that I think could cause it,
Matt,
You can speed up the calculations considerably if you keep several
things in mind:
- buffer numbers are never reused.
- built-in vim functions are written in C and are very fast
- although you can open many files at once (like vim *.cs), buffers are
usually (always?) deleted one at a time.
On 11/13/06, Eggum, DavidX S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
let s:prev_last = 0
let s:prev_count = 0
function! GetBufCount()
let last = bufnr('$')
if last != s:prev_last
Argh...of course...that's the solution to my buffer-tracking problems
as well. I'm writing a high-level object-oriented i
On Mon 13-Nov-06 8:54am -0600, Matt Zyzik wrote:
>> On Sun 12-Nov-06 7:54pm -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Well I'm reporting the above "g:zbuflistcount" in my 'rulerformat'.
>> Don't you think you should have mentioned that?
>>> I really don't think I can afford the baggage of calling yo
Eggum, DavidX S wrote:
Matt,
You can speed up the calculations considerably if you keep several
things in mind:
- buffer numbers are never reused.
- built-in vim functions are written in C and are very fast
- although you can open many files at once (like vim *.cs), buffers are
usually (always?)
, DavidX S
Cc: Matt Zyzik; Yakov Lerner; vim-dev@vim.org
Subject: Re: buffer list count
Eggum, DavidX S wrote:
> Matt,
>
> You can speed up the calculations considerably if you keep several
> things in mind:
> - buffer numbers are never reused.
> - built-in vim functions are written
! GetBufCount()
return s:prev_count
endfunction
-Original Message-
From: Eggum, DavidX S
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 5:36 PM
To: A.J.Mechelynck
Cc: Matt Zyzik; Yakov Lerner; vim-dev@vim.org
Subject: RE: buffer list count
Thank you for the correction, Tony. If the BufDelete command
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 04:06:56PM -0600, Bill McCarthy wrote:
> The "No" I wrote means that I agree that calling a user
> function that takes (on my computer) 4ms is too slow.
>
> I tested by opening about 100 files and wrote a function to
> call the posted function 1000 times. That test took a
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 02:04:40AM +0100, A.J.Mechelynck wrote:
> Eggum, DavidX S wrote:
> >Matt,
> >
> >You can speed up the calculations considerably if you keep several
> >things in mind:
> >- buffer numbers are never reused.
> >- built-in vim functions are written in C and are very fast
> >- al
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 08:25:42AM -0800, Eggum, DavidX S wrote:
> Try this (lightly tested):
>
> autocmd BufDelete * let s:prev_count -= 1
> set rulerformat=%60(%=%{GetBufCount()}%)
>
> let s:prev_last = 0
> let s:prev_count = 0
> function! GetBufCount()
>let last = bufnr('$')
>if last !
On Mon 13-Nov-06 7:54pm -0600, Eggum, DavidX S wrote:
> Okay, try this, Matt (it is, again, lightly tested). Granted, it
> recalculates from scratch every time, but it only does it when it needs
> to and it should still be pretty fast. It also doesn't rely on the
> events to be called once every
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 05:54:01PM -0800, Eggum, DavidX S wrote:
> Okay, try this, Matt (it is, again, lightly tested). Granted, it
> [...]
>
> set rulerformat=%60(%=%{GetBufCount()}%)
> autocmd VimEnter,BufAdd,BufDelete * call UpdateBufCount()
>
> let s:prev_last = 0
> let s:prev_count = 0
>
>
Hi,
> When my .vimrc is running, creating the BufAdd autocmds, all of the
> files (*.c) I think already have buffers assigned to them. I'm not sure,
> but this could cause the problem. A simple fix would just be a manual
> buffer count on VimEnter. I'm getting close to the best solution.
I think
19 matches
Mail list logo
