On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 08:33:29PM +0200, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> > If I undo a change, and then do
> >
> > undojoin | delete
> >
> > I get an error. Perhaps you could add a "undojoin!" command that
> > silently ignores the "undojoin" if the previous operation was an undo.
>
> That is not possible. Allowing this would corrupt the undo
> information. At least without making an effort of erasing the change
> that was undone before undojoin and fixing up the saved information.
> That means redo will not be possible.
Let me clarify what I meant:
:undojoin!
does *nothing* if the previous change was an undo, and is equivalent to
":undojoin" if the previous change was an undo. This is certainly
possible even in a script:
try
undojoin
catch
do nothing
endtry
But ":undojoin!" would eliminate such atrocities :).
> > Also after reading the documentation, I realize I'm unclear on the scope
> > of :undojoin. Does it mean all changes a script makes until the user
> > enters insert mode will be part of the previous undo block? Or just the
> > change immediately following the undojoin command? Could you clarify
> > this point a little in the docs?
>
> Mostly an undo block continues until user interaction. It's explained
> just above :undojoin.
My bad. Thanks,
GI
--
A 14.4 modem makes you want to get out and push!
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
