On Thursday, April 18, 2013 10:18:22 PM UTC-4, aschneiderg wrote:
> Hey there.
>
> Are your builds available online ? I would like to check them out.
>
> All the best.
Uploaded for you guys. Couldn't find any 64-bit builds myself, might as well
save everyone else the trouble. It's also quite a
On Thursday, April 18, 2013 3:52:30 PM UTC-5, vee...@veegee.org wrote:
> On Monday, October 15, 2012 3:43:30 AM UTC-4, aschneiderg wrote:
> > I understand they may result useful in some situations but I found them
> > annoying.
> >
> > Replacing WS_EX_CLIENTEDGE with WS_EX_LEFT in gui_w32.c did
> I found problem of my patch. It doesn't work with here doc. I'll look into it.
I've updated.
--
--
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
---
You
I found problem of my patch. It doesn't work with here doc. I'll look into it.
On Monday, April 15, 2013 8:06:36 PM UTC+9, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> Yasuhiro Matsumoto wrote:
>
>
>
> > When :py raise SystemExit, vim exit immediately. I know this is a spec
>
> > of python. But most of users don'
On 19/04/13 00:31, Don Cragun wrote:
I'm new to this forum and hope I'm not missing basic etiquette rules here.
There is a discussion going on in the UNIX and Linux Forums "UNIX for Dummies Questions &
Answers" forum titled "Knowing when a different program modifies a file" (see
http://www.uni
On Monday, October 15, 2012 3:43:30 AM UTC-4, aschneiderg wrote:
> I understand they may result useful in some situations but I found them
> annoying.
>
> Replacing WS_EX_CLIENTEDGE with WS_EX_LEFT in gui_w32.c did the trick for the
> top and left ones, but the bottom one is still there and the
I'm new to this forum and hope I'm not missing basic etiquette rules here.
There is a discussion going on in the UNIX and Linux Forums "UNIX for Dummies
Questions & Answers" forum titled "Knowing when a different program modifies a
file" (see
http://www.unix.com/unix-dummies-questions-answers/2
Hi Bram,
Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> I have fixed the patch file now. No idea how this happened.
>
> Even more strange, the test92.in file went missing in my source
> directory. This doesn't make the tests fail, unfortunately.
With the new patch, test93.in seems to be encoded in utf-8 (not latin-
Roland Eggner wrote:
> Content
> ---
> (1) Problem investigation
> (2) Proposed solutions
> (2.1) @
> (2.2) @ Bram
[...]
> (1) Problem investigation
> --
>
> (1.1) Looks everything ok on your side, apart from file “test92.in”, which
> gots
> mangled by impr
On 2013-04-18 Thursday at 19:36 +0200 Roland Eggner wrote:
> Content
> ---
> (1) Problem investigation
> (2) Proposed solutions
> (2.1) @
> (2.2) @ Bram
Wrong file attached, sorry. Here is the intended “test92.in”.
--
Regards
Roland Eggner
vim: set ft=vim fenc=utf-8:
Tests if :mksessi
Content
---
(1) Problem investigation
(2) Proposed solutions
(2.1) @
(2.2) @ Bram
Hi !
On 2013-04-18 Thursday at 13:28 +1000 wrote:
> Roland Eggner wrote:
> > On 2013-04-17 Wednesday at 12:39 +1000 wrote:
> > > … …
> > > test test92.in file looks wrong here. perhaps multiply-encoded.
>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Ben Fritz
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > See image attached to my next message for what I see.
>>> >
>>> > And please bottom-post.
>>> >
>>> Thanks Ben, can't see clearly your image but maybe indeed the bug was
>>> fixed in your version. Here is what I see (att
Hi,
I have recently learnt of a patch that was submitted to the list almost
five years ago. Please see here:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/vim_dev/lR5rONDwgs8/iLsVCrxo_WsJ
The reception was positive but for some reason the discussion was
abandoned. I would like to reopen the discussion. I'd be
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
>
> Dimitar wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Ben Fritz
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > See image attached to my next message for what I see.
>> >
>> > And please bottom-post.
>> >
>> Thanks Ben, can't see clearly your image but maybe inde
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Nazri Ramliy wrote:
> Thanks for the notice. I'll look into this again. My initial approach at
> solving this was to replace all backslashes in the expanded path parts
> into forward slashes but that seemed a bit too blankety of a solution
> at that time.
>
> Mayb
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Ingo Karkat wrote:
> Please note that for the root directory, C:\ is different than C: (which
> means the current working directory of the C drive), so leaving off the
> trailing path separator may cause problems in this case. (I haven't
> checked your patch, but :
On Thu, April 18, 2013 15:45, Ingo Karkat wrote:
> It's not silly, you're just not used to it! (I started with CP/M and
> MS-DOS 5; maybe I have a different perspective.)
That is the case. I started with MS-DOS 4.X and have never come across
that. But ok, may be it is just my expectation.
regard
On 18-Apr-2013 15:15 +0200, Christian Brabandt wrote:
> On Thu, April 18, 2013 15:32, Ingo Karkat wrote:
>> On 18-Apr-2013 15:15 +0200, Christian Brabandt wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, April 18, 2013 15:06, Ingo Karkat wrote:
Please note that for the root directory, C:\ is different than C:
(whi
On Thu, April 18, 2013 15:32, Ingo Karkat wrote:
> On 18-Apr-2013 15:15 +0200, Christian Brabandt wrote:
>
>> On Thu, April 18, 2013 15:06, Ingo Karkat wrote:
>>> Please note that for the root directory, C:\ is different than C:
>>> (which
>>> means the current working directory of the C drive), so
On 18-Apr-2013 15:15 +0200, Christian Brabandt wrote:
> On Thu, April 18, 2013 15:06, Ingo Karkat wrote:
>> Please note that for the root directory, C:\ is different than C: (which
>> means the current working directory of the C drive), so leaving off the
>> trailing path separator may cause probl
On Thu, April 18, 2013 15:06, Ingo Karkat wrote:
> Please note that for the root directory, C:\ is different than C: (which
> means the current working directory of the C drive), so leaving off the
> trailing path separator may cause problems in this case. (I haven't
> checked your patch, but :echo
On 18-Apr-2013 14:14 +0200, Nazri Ramliy wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Nazri Ramliy wrote:
>> I can reproduce this with my gvim 7.3.46 (on linux vim 7.3.892 there's> no
>> problem). I'll investigate and hopefully post a fix soon.
>
> I found the problem and the solution.
>
> Proble
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Nazri Ramliy wrote:
> I can reproduce this with my gvim 7.3.46 (on linux vim 7.3.892 there's> no
> problem). I'll investigate and hopefully post a fix soon.
I found the problem and the solution.
Problem summary:
expand_path_option() leaves trailing path separat
23 matches
Mail list logo
