Hi Mike!
On So, 21 Jul 2013, Mike Williams wrote:
> On 20/07/2013 10:13, LCD 47 wrote:
> > I believe this can be fixed with a counter that means something
> >along the lines of: "this line is longer than &tw, and it has no
> >breaking point for the first X characters". Then X would be update
On Jul 23, 2013 9:24 AM, "Gary Johnson" wrote:
>
> On 2013-07-23, Nikolay Pavlov wrote:
> >
> > On Jul 20, 2013 2:28 AM, "Gary Johnson" wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2013-07-19, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Dimitar,
> > >
> > > It would be a big help to those of us with threading mail readers if
On 2013-07-23, Nikolay Pavlov wrote:
>
> On Jul 20, 2013 2:28 AM, "Gary Johnson" wrote:
> >
> > On 2013-07-19, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
> >
> > Hi Dimitar,
> >
> > It would be a big help to those of us with threading mail readers if
> > you would be sure that your replies include "Re: " at the star
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 07:39:12AM +0400, Nikolay Pavlov wrote:
> On Jul 20, 2013 2:28 AM, "Gary Johnson" wrote:
> >
> > On 2013-07-19, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
> >
> > Hi Dimitar,
> >
> > It would be a big help to those of us with threading mail readers if
> > you would be sure that your replies i
On Jul 20, 2013 2:28 AM, "Gary Johnson" wrote:
>
> On 2013-07-19, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
>
> Hi Dimitar,
>
> It would be a big help to those of us with threading mail readers if
> you would be sure that your replies include "Re: " at the start of
> the Subject.
This has nothing to do with thread
Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
> > There is no use case
> If you do something stupid by accident most vim operations can be
> aborted by ctrl-c (exception: python, rbuy, .. scripts)
Try to abort it you will see the success you have.
> So there is still nothing to fix or talk about unless there is a us
On 20/07/2013 10:13, LCD 47 wrote:
On 19 July 2013, Mike Williams wrote:
On 19/07/2013 15:52, Mike Williams wrote:
On 19/07/2013 12:18, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
Hi,
Did a search on the vim_dev archives but couldn't find anything
related to this. Sorry if this is redundant. Basically vim is
e
On 19 July 2013, Mike Williams wrote:
> On 19/07/2013 15:52, Mike Williams wrote:
> >On 19/07/2013 12:18, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>Did a search on the vim_dev archives but couldn't find anything
> >>related to this. Sorry if this is redundant. Basically vim is
> >>exponentially sl
> > There is no use case
> If you do something stupid by accident most vim operations can be
> aborted by ctrl-c (exception: python, rbuy, .. scripts)
Try to abort it you will see the success you have.
> So there is still nothing to fix or talk about unless there is a use
> case.
>
> Marc Weber
> There is no use case
If you do something stupid by accident most vim operations can be
aborted by ctrl-c (exception: python, rbuy, .. scripts)
So there is still nothing to fix or talk about unless there is a use
case.
Marc Weber
--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do
On 2013-07-19, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
Hi Dimitar,
It would be a big help to those of us with threading mail readers if
you would be sure that your replies include "Re: " at the start of
the Subject.
Thanks,
Gary
--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Ty
> > Hi,
> >
> > Did a search on the vim_dev archives but couldn't find anything related to
> > this. Sorry if this is redundant.
> > Basically vim is exponentially slow after 100iHello as mentioned
> > in this link:
> > http://www.galexander.org/vim_sucks.html
> Let's discuss the use case, f
Excerpts from Dimitar DIMITROV's message of Fri Jul 19 23:14:44 +0200 2013:
> Try to abort it you will see the success you have.
1600iAuto aborts almost instantly
VIM - Vi IMproved 7.3 (2010 Aug 15, compiled Jun 9 2013 16:56:22)
Included patches: 1-1155
vim and gvim tested .. Have I don
On 19/07/2013 15:52, Mike Williams wrote:
On 19/07/2013 12:18, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
Hi,
Did a search on the vim_dev archives but couldn't find anything related to
this. Sorry if this is redundant.
Basically vim is exponentially slow after 100iHello as mentionned in
this link:
http://w
On 19/07/2013 12:18, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote:
Hi,
Did a search on the vim_dev archives but couldn't find anything related to
this. Sorry if this is redundant.
Basically vim is exponentially slow after 100iHello as mentionned in
this link:
http://www.galexander.org/vim_sucks.html
A quick
Excerpts from Dimitar DIMITROV's message of Fri Jul 19 13:18:09 +0200 2013:
> Hi,
>
> Did a search on the vim_dev archives but couldn't find anything related to
> this. Sorry if this is redundant.
> Basically vim is exponentially slow after 100iHello as mentionned
> in this link:
> http://w
Hi,
Did a search on the vim_dev archives but couldn't find anything related to
this. Sorry if this is redundant.
Basically vim is exponentially slow after 100iHello as mentionned in
this link:
http://www.galexander.org/vim_sucks.html
Regards
Dimitar
---
GPG Key: 2048R/160C6FA8 2012-10
17 matches
Mail list logo
