Re: [vile] (no subject)

[Thomas Dickey]

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:45:10PM -0400, Wayne Cuddy wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 04:12:44PM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 10:49:11AM -0400, address@hidden wrote:
> > > : ; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:41:04 -0400
> > > Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:41:04 -0400
> > > From: Wayne Cuddy <address@hidden>
> > > To: Vile List <address@hidden>
> > > Subject: show contents of only a specified register
> > ...
> > > Is there a way to show the contents just one register?
> > 
> > You could do this with a macro, e.g., something using the "put" command
> > into a buffer.
> >  
> > > Sometimes I have a lot of registers in use so show-registers is a
> > > little noisy.
> >
> 
> So here is the macro that I've come up with. The problem I'm having is
> that the 'put' function doesn't seem to accept the register to put from.

hmm -- I should have spent more time before replying, rather than rely upon
memory.  But I've spent a little more time thinking how to improve this
area:

a) my initial view was noticing that there's no name-completion for registers,
   and there's no special parameter type of registers for macros.  Seemed like
   an area for improvement.
b) As it exists, vile is running use-register before the put/yank commands.
   That doesn't seem to mesh with scripts.  At the moment I'm investigating
   how to improve _that_ (or discover how it can be made to work with scripts).
 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> store-procedure show-register string="reg" "show the contents of a single 
> register"
>     ~local %bn
>     setv %bn &cat "register-" $1
>     find-file %bn
>     1 goto-line
>     delete-lines-til end-of-file
>     put $1
> ~endm
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> I've tried:
> 
> put "$1"
> $1 put
> "$1" put
> 
> It will only put the contents of the unnamed register. If there is
> nothing in the unnamed register then it produces an error stating there
> is nothing in register 0.
> 
> Also, I would have preferred to use kill-buffer to remove any existing
> register-X buffer before putting the register's contents. However when a
> buffer already exists, which is the case on subsequent runs, kill-buffer
> prompts to remove a modified but unsaved buffer. I tried the various
> nowarn settings as well as ~force with no success.

c) for this, I would refer to the which-keywords macro -- the first third
   of that does the sort of buffer manipulation you're talking about.

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey <address@hidden>
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature