Carlo Baldassi wrote: >> Hello! >> >> I'm wondering about how the patch(es) work -- is it a save&restore or is >> it a prevent-any-modification? I'm in favor of save&restore; >> prevent-any-modification is certainly going to cause problems. >> > Hi! > > The "lockjumps" patch (filename: "lkjcmd_patch.txt") does a > "prevent-any-modification to the jumplist". It works as the current > keepjumps, except 1) it's recursive 2) it doesn't lock marks. So it will only > cause problems with scripts which try to use the jumplist, e.g. by trying to > run `exe "normal \<c-o>"`. The lock is only for adding entries in the > jumplist; the jumplist is still updated in case of insertions/deletions. > (However, this will no longer be true if used in conjunction with lockmarks, > obviously.)
Which includes netrw and its netrw#BrowseX() function (ie. hit x with the cursor atop a special filename such as abc.pdf or use gx outside of netrw buffers). > > The "keepjumps!" patch (filename: "lkjbang_patch.txt") does a > "save-and-restore". It acts on the same marks as the current "keepjumps" > implementation, plus the jumplist. It should not cause any problems to > running code, and keeps track of insertions/deletions in the backed-up list, > so that when it's restored everything should still make sense. Of course, > saving and restoring and keeping track of changes requires more internal work > than just locking up everything. > Regards, Chip Campbell -- -- 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 received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
