Tom McDonald wrote:
> On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:21:30 AM UTC-4, Christian Wellenbrock wrote:
> > On Friday, June 13, 2014 4:39:37 PM UTC+2, Tom McDonald wrote:
> > > Here's a recording of a demonstration of the current behaviour:
> > >
> > > https://asciinema.org/a/10129
> >
> > I agree that this change is useful and more consistent.
> >
> > @Tom: In the meantime you could try targets.vim [1] which supports that
> > behavior [2].
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/wellle/targets.vim
> > [2] https://github.com/wellle/targets.vim/pull/75
>
> After looking more carefully at Vim's source, I found that
> current_block() is only used for (), [], {}, and <>. I see no reason
> why <> shouldn't be included in this behaviour, so here's an updated
> patch that just removes the condition entirely.
I can't think of a reason to have this inconsistency. So let's include
this change. Would be nice to have tests for this. I'm actually
surprised no test fails because of this change.
--
ARTHUR: Who are you?
TALL KNIGHT: We are the Knights Who Say "Ni"!
BEDEVERE: No! Not the Knights Who Say "Ni"!
"Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY) PICTURES LTD
/// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
/// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org ///
\\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///
--
--
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 [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
