[vim/vim] Question-mark or forward-slash truncates a search-string (Issue #11460)
Carl Ponder
Steps to reproduce
Create a file with this in it:
foo/a
foo/b
foo/bar
foo?bar
Do a search by typing "/foo/bar" or "?foo?bar". It will highlight all occurrences of "foo", not just "foo/bar" or "foo?bar".
Note that "/foo?bar" and "?foo/bar" both work.
### Expected behaviour
I would expect the whole string to have been searched for.
I know that this has been a longstanding issue, and many people have posted explanations on how to escape the embedded "/" or "?".
But where in the vim specification does it say the embedded "/" or "?" is not a literal?
I'm doing a search here, not a substitution, so it looks to me like this is just a deficiency in the implementation, likely you're using the same code to process both searches and substitutions, and decomposing the command-string prior to performing the search.
### Version of Vim
VIM - Vi IMproved 8.2 (2019 Dec 12, compiled Sep 13 2022 09:35:02) Included patches: 1-3995, 4563, 4646, 4774, 4895, 4899, 4901, 4919 Modified by team...@tracker.debian.org Compiled by team...@tracker.debian.org Huge version without GUI.
### Environment
Ubuntu 22.04
xterm-256color
GNU bash, version 5.1.16(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
### Logs and stack traces
_No response_
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Carl Ponder
Ok looking further, I see that there's an oprional "count" argument allowed:
?foo?2
/foo/2
Could you add an option to disable this?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Carl Ponder
And, honestly, why couldn't the syntax have been "2/foo" instead of "/foo/2", which would have allowed for "2/foo/bar" to work?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Carl Ponder
Based on this posting
https://vim.fandom.com/wiki/Searching_for_expressions_which_include_slashes
I tried re-mapping the '/' in my ~/.vimrc
command! -nargs=1 / let @/ = <q-args>|set hlsearch
but it didn't work.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Gary Johnson
> Based on this posting
> https://vim.fandom.com/wiki/Searching_for_expressions_which_include_slashes
> I tried re-mapping the '/' in my ~/.vimrc
>
> command! -nargs=1 / let @/ = <q-args>|set hlsearch
>
> but it didn't work.
upper-case letter. See
:help user-commands
To remap a command such as /, you must use a mapping, such as this
example:
:cnoremap <CR> <C-\>eescape(getcmdline(), '/')<CR><CR>:cunmap <lt>CR><CR>
See
:help map-overview
:help x_CTRL-\_e
:help getcmdline()
:helpgrep \cctrl-\\.\?e
and the mappings in the file
$VIMRUNTIME/macros/less.vim
That mapping is probably too simple, but it worked in the few test
cases I tried.
HTH,
Gary
vim-dev ML
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Gary Johnson
mapping /. Here's a better example, again just fleshed out to the
point of working, but closer to a complete solution.
:nnoremap / :call SlashEscape()<CR>/
:function SlashEscape()
: cnoremap <CR> <C-\>eescape(getcmdline(), '/')<CR><CR>:cunmap <lt>CR><CR>
:endfunction
Regards,
Gary
vim-dev ML
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Carl Ponder
IUsing the above, tried to search with the command "/foo/bar" but it gave me the error
E486: Pattern not found: foo\\
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you commented.
Carl Ponder
Ok. And adding this seems to take care of the analogous case with ? search:
:nnoremap ? :call QuestionEscape()<CR>?
:function QuestionEscape()
: cnoremap <CR> <C-\>eescape(getcmdline(), '?')<CR><CR>:cunmap <lt>CR><CR>
:endfunction
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you commented.
Carl Ponder
Closed #11460 as completed.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub.
You are receiving this because you commented.
