Maciej Kalisiak wrote:
On 02/06/06, A.J.Mechelynck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If successive messages flit by too fast, they can in some cases erase
one another. As long as they appear in ":messages" it shouldn't really
be a problem.
I get the same behaviour as you mention later in your email.
Admittedly this is a minor thing as you point out, but probably still
a bug? Seems pointless to print a message, only to immediately clear
it... I don't see this as the intended behaviour.
Or is this some sort of fallout from the default vim settings,
something correctable with 'shortmess' and its ilk? If it's an
unknown bug, I'll file a bug report w/bugreport.vim...
BTW, the way to determine precisely which version you're using is with
the ":version" command. Usually the first few lines are enough; the rest
describe (in this order) which features were and weren't compiled-in,
where Vim looks for its files, and which arguments were given on the
command-lines to the compile and link commands.
Ah, thanks, forgot I could have done that. For the record then, I'm
seeing this behaviour in
Vim 7.0 (2006 May 7, compiled May 7 2006 16:23:43)
MS-Windows 32 bit GUI version with OLE support
Compiled by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Big version with GUI
on WinXP SP2.
Since there is no "Included patches" line, this is 7.0.000. Bram
compiles each new version, but not each new patchlevel. My version says:
VIM - Vi IMproved 7.0 (2006 May 7, compiled May 15 2006 16:20:22)
Included patches: 1-17
Compiled by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Huge version with GTK2 GUI. Features included (+) or not (-):
etc., running on Novell-SuSE Linux Professional 9.3.
I believe the problem (which you and me both see) is
well-enough-defined; when Bram comes back, he'll (hopefully) tell us if
it is worth fixing.
Best regards,
Tony.
