On 17-May-2011 17:07, hari.rangara...@gmail.com wrote: > Ingo -- I did check out your plugin, and I might actually end up using > it regularly :). There were a basic things which caught my eye as > incomplete: Is there a reason you didn't choose to implement the 'ge' > operator? > > [code snipped]
You're right, there's currently no "ge". First of all, I rarely use the built-in one (I simply haven't committed this to muscle memory yet), and second, the motions are driven by regular expressions with many different branches that often interact in strange ways, so skipping this one case made it easier for me to develop. I guess eventually this will be implemented; before that happens I'd need to invest in automated testing / verification, but then the current motions seem to work quite well, so there's no pressing need for that. Classic hen-egg problem :-) -- regards, ingo -- 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
