Newbie: What determines the command repeated by the . command?
samppi
apparently very useful "." command. It repeats the "last command",
which actually may be a string of commands like "dd" or "A<delete>
{<return>}<return><esc>".
But what determines how far back these compound commands reach? Is it
determined by the amount of time between each keystroke? (If so, is
that pause customizable?) Can certain keystrokes start a new chain? Is
there even a rule?
John Beckett
> I'm trying out vim for the first time, and I'm wondering
> about the apparently very useful "." command. It repeats the
> "last command", which actually may be a string of commands
> like "dd" or "A<delete> {<return>}<return><esc>".
>
> But what determines how far back these compound commands
> reach?
Pressing . repeats the last normal-mode command entered (a
single command). You need some experience to work out what that
actually means. Some examples (each time, from normal mode, that
is, you have pressed Escape):
Press i then type some text (a little or a lot) then press Esc.
Now move cursor elsewhere and press . to repeat the insert
(pressing i and typing is a single command).
Type daw to delete a word. If wanted, move cursor. Press . to
delete a word.
Type gqip to format (wrap lines) a paragraph. Move cursor and
press . to format another paragraph.
Type 5dd to delete 5 lines. Press . to delete another 5 lines.
John
Efraim Yawitz
David
is q: what you are looking for?
David
Efraim Yawitz
Alessandro Antonello
2009/8/6 samppi <rbys...@gmail.com>:
I think you should see the ':changes' command (:help changes). It output a
list of last changes in the current buffer. The last one will be repeated when
you press '.' in normal mode. But the '.' command also repeat a yank command
that is not a change in the buffer. See ':help .' for an explanation.
Regards,
Alessandro
Charles Campbell
Mailing-List's Standard.
Thanks!
Chip Campbell
samppi
trying to figure out the rule that determines how changes are
separated. Does vim measure the amount of time between keystrokes
(e.g. two seconds after the last keystroke, before which a new
keystroke is added to the latest change, and after which the new
keystroke starts a new change)? Thanks for the replies in advance.
On Aug 6, 5:46 am, Alessandro Antonello <antonello....@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi, samppi.
>
> 2009/8/6 samppi <rbysam...@gmail.com>:
John Beckett
of the message you are replying to, and put your text underneath.
See the list guidelines:
http://groups.google.com/group/vim_use/web/vim-information
Ben Fritz
On Aug 7, 12:17 am, samppi <rbysam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the tips; :changes is especially useful. But I'm still
> trying to figure out the rule that determines how changes are
> separated. Does vim measure the amount of time between keystrokes
> (e.g. two seconds after the last keystroke, before which a new
> keystroke is added to the latest change, and after which the new
> keystroke starts a new change)? Thanks for the replies in advance.
>
COMMAND. Period. End of sentence.
i, a, I, A, o, O, etc. are all considered normal mode commands, thus
any typing you do between entering insert mode and leaving with <esc>
will be repeated with '.'.
Also as several people have said, BOTTOM POST to this mailing list, as
I am doing now, BENEATH a short quote of your email.
bill lam
You moderators have already done an excellent job, but did you get
tired of sending this reminder, I can see people just keep on
ignoring, in that case, this kind of reminder just add noise to
mailing list. Or your reminder is too friendly?
--
regards,
====================================================
GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24
gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3
Ben Fritz
On Aug 7, 9:21 am, bill lam <cbill....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You moderators have already done an excellent job, but did you get
> tired of sending this reminder, I can see people just keep on
> ignoring, in that case, this kind of reminder just add noise to
> mailing list. Or your reminder is too friendly?
>
remember correctly Bram himself stated that we needed to remain
friendly and helpful even in the face of repeat offenders. Others on
the list were discussing such things as banning or at least ignoring
willful violators, but after Bram's statement, we've just gone back to
friendly reminders after violations. Most users I've seen have
apologized and changed their ways out of politeness, but we will
always have others who ignore the reminders for one reason or another.
Gene Kwiecinski
>>of the message you are replying to, and put your text underneath.
>>See the list guidelines:
>>http://groups.google.com/group/vim_use/web/vim-information
>You moderators have already done an excellent job, but did you get
>tired of sending this reminder, I can see people just keep on
>ignoring, in that case, this kind of reminder just add noise to
>mailing list. Or your reminder is too friendly?
Wellp, I can't/won't speak for anyone else here, but when I see
something that's, well, "offensive", whether it be a blinding white
retina-searing background on html email (or some garish colorscheme,
etc.), or an entire video-page of nothing but quoted text where I'd have
to scroll down 3 screens' worth just to see the entire replied-to
message with nothing but an added "Thanks, that worked!" at the very
end, etc., I just plain skip to the next email w/o even looking further.
I *would* say that it's in the posters' own best interests to "do as the
Romans do", but if they refuse that little bit of courtesy to the rest
of the group just to *insist* on doing what they want to keep doing,
then hey, their emails don't even get looked at, let alone replied to.
Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
bill lam <c...@gmail.com> dixit:
> On Fri, 07 Aug 2009, John Beckett wrote:
>>
>> Please bottom post on this list. Quote a small (relevant) part of the
>> message you are replying to, and put your text underneath.
>>
>> See the list guidelines:
>> http://groups.google.com/group/vim_use/web/vim-information
>
> You moderators have already done an excellent job, but did you get
> tired of sending this reminder, I can see people just keep on
> ignoring, in that case, this kind of reminder just add noise to
> mailing list. Or your reminder is too friendly?
Bram told me something like that when I decided that, for a day, I would
signal *all* top-posters after some people insisted on top-posting even
though John had warned them. I felt that John was alone in his warnings
and since I'm a list admin too, I decided to act so people won't think
that the entire top-posting warning thing was a personal preference of
John.
I won't go into details but warning each and every offender was not the
preferred solution and anyway top-posters are die hard and insist in
their annoying behaviour. I find it very rude giving that John have
warned them *very friendly* and very frequently.
Since the warnings are ignored I've decided to take another course of
action using GMail filters *only on my account, not on the list*: if
someone top-posts, his address goes to a filter that marks his messages,
and after a second top-post, I delete all messages coming from that
address. If top-posters thing their time is more valuable than mine,
they're wrong.
As a list admin I of course cannot do the same and won't do the same,
but I won't warn anyone again. And yes, I think the reminder is way too
friendly, but a ruder one won't have any effect anyway and John Beckett
is a very friendly person so I find the reminder quite adequate.
--
Raúl "DervishD" Núñez de Arenas Coronado
Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to... RAmen!
Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
Gene Kwiecinski <g...@dclab.com> dixit:
> I *would* say that it's in the posters' own best interests to "do as
> the Romans do", but if they refuse that little bit of courtesy to the
> rest of the group just to *insist* on doing what they want to keep
> doing, then hey, their emails don't even get looked at, let alone
> replied to.
Exactly! Gene, you hit the nail directly in the head: if people insist
on being rude and ignore list *guidelines* (not rules, guidelines, it's
a matter of courtesy, not law) and consider their time more valuable
than mine, I won't spend even a femtosecond reading their messages.
Fortunately, this can be fully automated.
And BTW, when a top-poster has not been warned I allow a bit of
tolerance margin just in case he was not aware of the guidelines or
whatever (hey, everyone can have a bad day, me first). After he has been
warned, my tolerance level is zero because he cannot plead ignorance.
Shawn H. Corey
> ... nothing but quoted text where I'd have
> to scroll down 3 screens' worth just to see the entire replied-to
> message with nothing but an added "Thanks, that worked!" at the very
> end, etc., I just plain skip to the next email w/o even looking further.
>
You're talking about people who don't prune the quotes. This is one
reason people prefer top-posting; they're too lazy to cut out everything
but what they're replying to. :)
--
Just my 0.00000002 million dollars worth,
Shawn
Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about coding.
I like Perl; it's the only language where you can bless your
thingy.
Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
Shawn H. Corey <s...@gmail.com> dixit:
> Gene Kwiecinski wrote:
>> nothing but quoted text where I'd have to scroll down 3 screens'
>> worth just to see the entire replied-to message with nothing but an
>> added "Thanks, that worked!" at the very end, etc., I just plain skip
>> to the next email w/o even looking further.
>
> You're talking about people who don't prune the quotes. This is one
> reason people prefer top-posting; they're too lazy to cut out
> everything but what they're replying to. :)
People who don't prune the quotes is annoying, certainly, because they
force you to read sometimes hundreds of lines to get to the real answer,
but at least they force you to read in the proper order, top to bottom,
so in the worst case it's a matter of scrolling down. OK, it's far from
perfect but at least the reading order is preserved. Top-posters usually
don't prune quotes either, and they force you to switch reading order,
which is worse.
I prefer proper quoting were possible, with the reply interleaved with
the quoted text. That's the way I learnt and even though it takes a bit
more of time (not in my case as most of the job is done by Vim) it is
worth the effort: it preserves reading order and (ideally) only the
material that makes sense is quoted. This said, I can tolerate certain
"full-quote" messages as long as they are bottom posted and the reply
is worth the pain, but I don't read top-posted messages, specially if
they have been quoted themselves because then reading order is not
top-to-bottom, it is just chaos.
Shawn H. Corey
> I prefer proper quoting were possible, with the reply interleaved with
> the quoted text.
But interleaving won't be necessary if they kept their post to a single
point each.
Glen Pfeiffer
> People who don't prune the quotes is annoying, certainly,
> because they force you to read sometimes hundreds of lines to
> get to the real answer, but at least they force you to read in
> the proper order, top to bottom, so in the worst case it's a
> matter of scrolling down.
Top posting without trimming is bad, but in my opinion bottom
posting without trimming is worse. But it doesn't matter that we
disagree on that, because we agree on the one true way to reply
- inline replies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Inline_replying
--
Glen
Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
Glen Pfeiffer <g...@thepfeiffers.net> dixit:
> Top posting without trimming is bad, but in my opinion bottom posting
> without trimming is worse.
Well, really I don't like neither option, but I find bottom posting
without trimming easier to tolerate since all I need to do is "GG" in
Vim. But certainly none of these styles is good.
> But it doesn't matter that we disagree on that, because we agree on
> the one true way to reply - inline replies.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Inline_replying
Yep, you're right ;))
Sandip Bhattacharya
>Well, really I don't like neither option, but I find bottom posting
>without trimming easier to tolerate since all I need to do is "GG" in
>Vim. But certainly none of these styles is good.
>
the quoted text, therefore not letting them realize that other email
clients have to see the entire quote.
- Sandip
John Beckett
> Top posting without trimming is bad, but in my opinion bottom
> posting without trimming is worse. But it doesn't matter that
> we disagree on that, because we agree on the one true way to
> reply - inline replies.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Inline_replying
Let's not discuss this any further, but I wanted to say that
while of course the above is correct, I call it "bottom posting"
in my reminders because I have to keep it simple for the folk
who think it is ok to post whatever they like without reading.
We have agreed on the list guidelines:
http://groups.google.com/group/vim_use/web/vim-information
John
Charlie Kester
>
>People who don't prune the quotes is annoying, certainly, because they
>force you to read sometimes hundreds of lines to get to the real answer,
>but at least they force you to read in the proper order, top to bottom,
>so in the worst case it's a matter of scrolling down. OK, it's far from
>perfect but at least the reading order is preserved. Top-posters usually
>don't prune quotes either, and they force you to switch reading order,
>which is worse.
I use mutt to read the list, in a full-screen terminal window. Not
counting the header lines, that leaves around 50 lines for each message.
I have mutt configured to display quoted text in a different color than
new text, so I can easily see which is which. If I don't see anything
except quoted text in those 50 lines -- and this is surprisingly common
-- I immediately move on to the next message. I do NOT scroll down in
hopes of eventually finding whatever it was the poster felt moved to
say.
IOW, I have a semi-automatic process for ignoring messages from
non-pruners.
I do read top-posts, but I grumble about it. ;-)
Marvin Renich
> I use mutt to read the list, in a full-screen terminal window. Not
> counting the header lines, that leaves around 50 lines for each message.
> I have mutt configured to display quoted text in a different color than
> new text, so I can easily see which is which. If I don't see anything
> except quoted text in those 50 lines -- and this is surprisingly common
> -- I immediately move on to the next message. I do NOT scroll down in
> hopes of eventually finding whatever it was the poster felt moved to
> say.
Are you aware of "S" (shift-s) in mutt to skip quoted?
Also, someone on this list suggested the t-prot package, which hides
TOFU and long signatures (when used with mutt, slrn, or inn2). I now
use it and find it extremely helpful in ignoring bad posting styles.
...Marvin
bill lam
> Also, I think mail clients like gmail tend to "spoil" users by hiding
> the quoted text, therefore not letting them realize that other email
> clients have to see the entire quote.
Apparently you use mutt ;-) You can press "T" to toggle hiding quoted
text. Or other ways as suggested by Charlie in this thread.
bill lam
> On Sat, 08 Aug 2009, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
> > Also, I think mail clients like gmail tend to "spoil" users by hiding
> > the quoted text, therefore not letting them realize that other email
> > clients have to see the entire quote.
>
> Apparently you use mutt ;-) You can press "T" to toggle hiding quoted
> text. Or other ways as suggested by Charlie in this thread.
Oop! Sorry it should be Marvin Renich.
Gene Kwiecinski
>>to scroll down 3 screens' worth just to see the entire replied-to
>>message with nothing but an added "Thanks, that worked!" at the very
>>end, etc., I just plain skip to the next email w/o even looking
further.
>You're talking about people who don't prune the quotes. This is one
That, too. Me personally, I'll try to prune away all but the basic gist
of what's being asked, eg, an OP will post a paragraph of what he's
doing, an example of what text he wants to operate on, and the question,
"How would I go about x/y/z?", I'll trim all but the final question,
*maybe* some relevant section of the text (if actually necessary), as
anyone who wants to read the background again can go back to the
original post.
>reason people prefer top-posting; they're too lazy to cut out
everything
>but what they're replying to. :)
And on a Winsucks system, I imagine <^A><del> is just *so* much work...
Seriously, all it takes is to reply to one person offering a solution,
delete *EVERYTHING*, and just reply back with a "Thanks, everyone, it
worked!" or whatever. Is it remotely relevant *which* post was replied
to when offering a thanks? Or in a more general situation, to include
an entire thread 5 levels deep when only replying to a single section?
It's just laziness that people don't bother when replying. So hey, why
should *I* bother to read it?
I just liken this to a situation where someone insists on calling
someone "Bobby" when the person strongly prefers "Robert". To insist,
over and over despite multiple correction, on calling someone a name he
makes clear he doesn't like, is selfish at best, demeaning and insulting
at worst.
Gene Kwiecinski
>>the Romans do", but if they refuse that little bit of courtesy to the
>>rest of the group just to *insist* on doing what they want to keep
>>doing, then hey, their emails don't even get looked at, let alone
>>replied to.
>Exactly! Gene, you hit the nail directly in the head: if people insist
>on being rude and ignore list *guidelines* (not rules, guidelines, it's
>a matter of courtesy, not law) and consider their time more valuable
>than mine, I won't spend even a femtosecond reading their messages.
>Fortunately, this can be fully automated.
I'll just generally look at the first video-page. Anything of interest
(ie, new text, readable style) and I'll keep reading. Nothing of
interest and/or offensive format, I'll skip it unread.
>And BTW, when a top-poster has not been warned I allow a bit of
>tolerance margin just in case he was not aware of the guidelines or
>whatever (hey, everyone can have a bad day, me first). After he has
been
>warned, my tolerance level is zero because he cannot plead ignorance.
Someone coming from a business environment, where all those morons
insist on top-posting as their /de facto/ standard (thanks, M$, you
sonsabitches) it may be simply forgetting to "switch modes". Me, I'm
stuck with OutHouse for now, so I have to ^A the entire text, clipboard
it, toss it into 'vim' to reformat it, then clipboard it back again, so
it's a rather tedious but not odious process. Doing so manually, forget
it, I'd prune down to nothing but a [summary] line vs '>'ing quoted text
line by line.
Point being, I'll allow *some* latitude, but do *not* accept "It's the
only mailer I have access to" as an excuse to keep top-posting, because
if *I* can go through that trouble (as I did for this and prior messages
today), then so can someone else. Someone once mentioned an uneditable
"feature" on blackberries (umm, african-american-berries now, I guess)
where it top-posts and doesn't even allow you to edit/see the original
text, and if so, I'd do whatever I could to *NOT* reply/post from one.
Still, top-post at your own peril, at least if you actually want anyone
to see your posts.
What galls me, though, is that "cutesy" email, almost always html, with
garish colorschemes, weird-ass indentation, blinding-white backgrounds,
etc., the poster had to actually go out of his way to select. And
*THAT* I find utterly unforgiveable. I had one client who did exactly
that and even had a background image of a spiral-bound notebook
left-border, as if that were supposed to be "cute". I was forced to
actually read his emails (once, only, as I generally refused to reread
any from him), but Hell if I didn't *immediately* strip all the crappy
html out of it before replying, even if he decided to use colors,
emphasis, etc., peppered throughout his text. (<alt><o><t><y></alt> in
OutHouse, in case anyone's interested.) And no amount of cutesy html
can hide atrocious grammar/spelling, if you know what I mean. <snicker>
Anyway, I vented enough for now...
Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
Gene Kwiecinski <g...@dclab.com> dixit:
>>And BTW, when a top-poster has not been warned I allow a bit of
>>tolerance margin just in case he was not aware of the guidelines or
>>whatever (hey, everyone can have a bad day, me first). After he has
>>been warned, my tolerance level is zero because he cannot plead
>>ignorance.
>
> Someone coming from a business environment, where all those morons
> insist on top-posting as their /de facto/ standard (thanks, M$, you
> sonsabitches) it may be simply forgetting to "switch modes". Me, I'm
> stuck with OutHouse for now, so I have to ^A the entire text,
> clipboard it, toss it into 'vim' to reformat it, then clipboard it
> back again, so it's a rather tedious but not odious process. Doing so
> manually, forget it, I'd prune down to nothing but a [summary] line vs
> '>'ing quoted text line by line.
I do the same with GMail (which I'm using now as my de facto mail user
agent), although I've automated the process a bit. GMail editor is just
an HTML text box and replying a long email with lots of quoted material
is almost impossible, so I use a firefox addon that allows me to edit
the message using Vim, which does a hell of a lot better job at that. In
fact, I think I would spend twice the time replying email if I couldn't
use Vim to do it. I'm just used to the couple of functions that allow me
to automatically reflow quoted text and a whole lot of things that Vim
does for me.
This said, without this extension it would be a matter of hitting ^E,
Super+Space+"v" to launch Gnome Do and choose Vim, "+p to paste the text
and then set the filetype to "mail". After editing and saving, ggVG"+y
and ^V in the HTML text box. It may look like a lot of work, but
certainly it isn't and with some training you don't even think about it
(in fact, it can be even easier using some key mappings in Vim to
automate everything).
So, you can always use Vim to reply email and that means that you don't
have to work a lot to use a decent reply style. I don't spend a lot of
time doing so, that's for sure.
Tony Mechelynck
[...]
> Me, I'm stuck with OutHouse for now, so I have to
I like the nickname. And when you use Out* Express, it's because you've
been hit by the /turista/?
[...]
> What galls me, though, is that "cutesy" email, almost always html, with
> garish colorschemes, weird-ass indentation, blinding-white backgrounds,
> etc., the poster had to actually go out of his way to select. And
> *THAT* I find utterly unforgiveable.
Yeah, me too. Anything in yellow on pink, or maybe pink on green, it's
"Next" immediately without reading. Unless I'm feeling extremely mellow
that particular day.
OTOH, I don't see what you mean by "blinding-white background", my
mailer (SeaMonkey) uses white (#FFFFFF I suppose) as default background,
also for plaintext (and black, #000000, as default foreground). But at
least, with plaintext it's the receiver, not the sender, who chooses the
BG-FG colours.
> I had one client who did exactly
> that and even had a background image of a spiral-bound notebook
> left-border, as if that were supposed to be "cute". I was forced to
> actually read his emails (once, only, as I generally refused to reread
> any from him), but Hell if I didn't *immediately* strip all the crappy
> html out of it before replying, even if he decided to use colors,
> emphasis, etc., peppered throughout his text. (<alt><o><t><y></alt> in
> OutHouse, in case anyone's interested.) And no amount of cutesy html
> can hide atrocious grammar/spelling, if you know what I mean.<snicker>
That's for sure. And even using a spell checker won't always detect
atrocious its <=> it's, their <=> there, where <=> wear, etc. English is
a difficult language with an awful lot of homonyms (though fewer than
Chinese, I've been told).
How did that joke run again? One I once saw in a random sig of mine,
about having nothing left to do but commit, er, sioux-e-sight or
something like that. ("Ghoti" is well-known but not in the dictionary,
any spell checker will reject it.)
>
> Anyway, I vented enough for now...
Best regards,
Tony.
--
Eagleson's Law:
Any code of your own that you haven't looked at for six or more
months, might as well have been written by someone else. (Eagleson is
an optimist, the real number is more like three weeks.)
Jürgen Krämer
Hi,
Tony Mechelynck wrote:
>
> How did that joke run again? One I once saw in a random sig of mine,
> about having nothing left to do but commit, er, sioux-e-sight or
> something like that. ("Ghoti" is well-known but not in the dictionary,
> any spell checker will reject it.)
| If an S and an I and an O and a U
| With an X at the end spell Su;
| And an E and a Y and an E spell I,
| Pray what is a speller to do?
| Then, if also an S and an I and a G
| And an HED spell side,
| There's nothing much left for a speller to do
| But to go commit siouxeyesighed.
| -- Charles Follen Adams, "An Orthographic Lament"
Regards,
Jürgen
--
Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere
in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. (Calvin)
Tony Mechelynck
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Tony Mechelynck wrote:
>>
>> How did that joke run again? One I once saw in a random sig of mine,
>> about having nothing left to do but commit, er, sioux-e-sight or
>> something like that. ("Ghoti" is well-known but not in the dictionary,
>> any spell checker will reject it.)
>
> | If an S and an I and an O and a U
> | With an X at the end spell Su;
> | And an E and a Y and an E spell I,
> | Pray what is a speller to do?
> | Then, if also an S and an I and a G
> | And an HED spell side,
> | There's nothing much left for a speller to do
> | But to go commit siouxeyesighed.
> | -- Charles Follen Adams, "An Orthographic Lament"
>
> Regards,
> Jürgen
>
Yeah, that was it, thanks.
Best regards,
Tony.
--
Whatever became of Strange de Jim? Well, he found a substitute for
cocaine: "You cover Q-tips with sandpaper and ram them up your nostrils
as far as they will go. Then you sniff talcum powder while shredding
hundred dollar bills."
-- Herb Caen