Re: [vile] Another compat question

[Paul Fox]

thomas wrote:
 > On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 09:30:44AM +0100, j. van den hoff wrote:
 > > On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 01:28:21 +0100, Thomas Dickey <address@hidden> wrote:
 > > 
 > > >On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 03:09:35PM -0800, Marc Simpson wrote:
 > > >>I've noticed that a successful line substitution moves the cursor,
 > > >>leaving it at the final replacement location. Here's a quick
 > > >>comparison:
 > > >>
 > > >>Initial buffer (cursor marked with the caret):
 > > >>
 > > >>  foo bar baz
 > > >>  ^
 > > >>
 > > >>after :s/b/c/g in vile:
 > > >>
 > > >>  foo car caz
 > > >>          ^
 > > >>
 > > >>after the same operation in nvi, ex-050325, vim:
 > > >>
 > > >>  foo car caz
 > > >>  ^
 > > >>
 > > >>Is this behaviour configurable?
 > > >
 > > >no - though it would be fairly easy to implement.  A few commands are
 > > 
 > > just my 2c:
 > > maybe that would really be nice to have: while I can see that the
 > > current behaviour is desirable in some situations the original
 > > behaviour (keep position) has also is merits, especially when doing
 > > document wide substitutions/tidy ups via macros.
 > 
 > yes (I added a to-do item).  Just reading the source history I see it's
 > been this way since 1993 - Paul's check-in comment refers to my 3.57
 > changes (though I don't see it clearly in CHANGES.R3 -- will resolve
 > that later...)

i was (and still am not) a heavy macro user.  so programmatic
compatibility wasn't at the top of the list.  sorry!!  i understand
how those differences would be annoying.

paul
=----------------------
 paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 20.3 degrees)