[vim/vim] Highlight all matched text while incremental searching (#2198)
haya14busa
This patch supports highlighting all matched text while incremental searching.
By removing SEARCH_KEEP flag, command line text is stored as last regexp
pattern and used for 'hlsearch' feture while incremental searching.
This patch is based on @itchyny's patch1. itchyny's patch didn't handle
cancelling incremental search by <Esc> or <C-c> and command line text is
stored as last pattern even if users cancell the search.
This patch fix this problem by store/restore the search pattern.
Also, I added 'inchlsearch' ("inc"remental "hlsearch") option to turn on/off this feature.
I'm the author of https://github.com/haya14busa/incsearch.vim which provide
similar functionality.
Actually, I'm satisfied with this plugin but I believe this feature is so
useful that it should be implemented with default vim :)
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198
Commit Summary
- Implement incremental highlight search feature
- improve patch
- add test and fix impl for ctrl-g/t handling and called from user functions
- up
- fix
- improve test
- move variable declaration
- move 'saved_last_search_spat' declaration
- fix if def
- rm testok
- fix style, if-def and update runtime files
- fix style
File Changes
- M runtime/doc/options.txt (15)
- M runtime/doc/quickref.txt (1)
- M runtime/optwin.vim (2)
- M src/ex_getln.c (17)
- M src/option.c (3)
- M src/option.h (1)
- M src/proto/search.pro (2)
- M src/search.c (43)
- M src/testdir/test_search.vim (33)
Patch Links:
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
Yegappan Lakshmanan
vim-dev ML
This is great. I have been looking for this feature for a long time.
Regards,
Yegappan
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 8:24 PM, haya14busa <vim-dev...@256bit.org>
wrote:
> searching.
>
> By removing SEARCH_KEEP flag, command line text is stored as last regexp
> pattern and used for 'hlsearch' feture while incremental searching.
>
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/vim_dev/incsearch%7Csort:relevance/vim_dev/zdp8W-6xUzg/PrqDpP7cilIJ>.
> itchyny's patch didn't handle
> cancelling incremental search by <Esc> or <C-c> and command line text is
> stored as last pattern even if users cancell the search.
> This patch fix this problem by store/restore the search pattern.
>
> Also, I added 'inchlsearch' ("inc"remental "hlsearch") option to turn
> on/off this feature.
>
> I'm the author of https://github.com/haya14busa/incsearch.vim which
> provide
> similar functionality.
> Actually, I'm satisfied with this plugin but I believe this feature is so
> useful that it should be implemented with default vim :)
> You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
>
> https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198
> Commit Summary
>
> - improve patch
> - add test and fix impl for ctrl-g/t handling and called from user
> functions
> - up
> - fix
> - improve test
> - move variable declaration
> - move 'saved_last_search_spat' declaration
> - fix if def
> - rm testok
> - fix style, if-def and update runtime files
> - fix style
>
> File Changes
>
> - *M* runtime/doc/options.txt
> <https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198/files#diff-0> (15)
> - *M* runtime/doc/quickref.txt
> <https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198/files#diff-1> (1)
> - *M* runtime/optwin.vim
> <https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198/files#diff-2> (2)
> - *M* src/ex_getln.c
> <https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198/files#diff-3> (17)
> - *M* src/option.c <https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198/files#diff-4>
> (3)
> - *M* src/option.h <https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198/files#diff-5>
> (1)
> - *M* src/proto/search.pro
> <https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198/files#diff-6> (2)
> - *M* src/search.c <https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198/files#diff-7>
> (43)
> - *M* src/testdir/test_search.vim
> <https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198/files#diff-8> (33)
>
> Patch Links:
>
> - https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198.patch
> - https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198.diff
Yegappan Lakshmanan
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Yegappan Lakshmanan <yega...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is great. I have been looking for this feature for a long time.
>
vim-dev ML
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Yegappan Lakshmanan <yega...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is great. I have been looking for this feature for a long time.
>
We should also add the live substitution feature (neovim's inccommand feature).
Regards,
Yegappan
>
> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 8:24 PM, haya14busa <vim-dev...@256bit.org>
> wrote:
>>
Yegappan Lakshmanan
>
> This is great. I have been looking for this feature for a long time.
>
'hlsearch' as it is distracting. Is it possible to make this feature work
independent of 'hlsearch'?
Thanks,
vim-dev ML
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Yegappan Lakshmanan <yega...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is great. I have been looking for this feature for a long time.
>
I tested this feature for some time and it worked correctly. I don't use
'hlsearch' as it is distracting. Is it possible to make this feature work
independent of 'hlsearch'?
Thanks,
Yegappan
>
> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 8:24 PM, haya14busa <vim-dev...@256bit.org>
> wrote:
>>
h_east
Good patch👍
If you only modify highlight I think that you do not need to add 'inchlsearch' option.
When 'incsearch' is set, I think that it is possible to do that feature in search-commands.
Of course, regardless of 'hlsearch'.
--Best regards,
Hirohito Higashi (h_east)
haya14busa
We can enable this feature without new 'inchlsearch' option and regardless 'hlsearch' with following patch.
But, I wonder is it really ok to make it default behavior. IncSearch and Search highlight is similar in some colorscheme and when you type ., all characters will be highlighted.
I thought someone may feel it's annoying behavior.
What do you think?
diff --git a/src/ex_getln.c b/src/ex_getln.c index 578a7c5fd..adc226fbf 100644 --- a/src/ex_getln.c +++ b/src/ex_getln.c @@ -1681,10 +1681,12 @@ getcmdline( { pos_T t; int search_flags = SEARCH_NOOF + SEARCH_PEEK; + int save_p_hls = p_hls; if (char_avail()) continue; save_last_search_pattern(); + p_hls = TRUE; cursor_off(); out_flush(); if (c == Ctrl_G) @@ -1694,8 +1696,6 @@ getcmdline( } else t = match_start; - if (!p_ihls) - search_flags += SEARCH_KEEP; ++emsg_off; i = searchit(curwin, curbuf, &t, c == Ctrl_G ? FORWARD : BACKWARD, @@ -1748,6 +1748,7 @@ getcmdline( old_botline = curwin->w_botline; update_screen(NOT_VALID); restore_last_search_pattern(); + p_hls = save_p_hls; redrawcmdline(); } else @@ -1896,6 +1897,7 @@ cmdline_changed: #ifdef FEAT_RELTIME proftime_T tm; #endif + int save_p_hls = p_hls; /* if there is a character waiting, search and redraw later */ if (char_avail()) @@ -1906,6 +1908,7 @@ cmdline_changed: incsearch_postponed = FALSE; curwin->w_cursor = search_start; /* start at old position */ save_last_search_pattern(); + p_hls = TRUE; /* If there is no command line, don't do anything */ if (ccline.cmdlen == 0) @@ -1923,8 +1926,6 @@ cmdline_changed: /* Set the time limit to half a second. */ profile_setlimit(500L, &tm); #endif - if (!p_ihls) - search_flags += SEARCH_KEEP; i = do_search(NULL, firstc, ccline.cmdbuff, count, search_flags, #ifdef FEAT_RELTIME @@ -1984,6 +1985,7 @@ cmdline_changed: update_screen(SOME_VALID); restore_cmdline(&save_ccline); restore_last_search_pattern(); + p_hls = save_p_hls; /* Leave it at the end to make CTRL-R CTRL-W work. */ if (i != 0)
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Yegappan Lakshmanan
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 11:32 PM, haya14busa <vim-dev...@256bit.org> wrote:
> We can enable this feature without new 'inchlsearch' option and regardless
> 'hlsearch' with following patch.
>
>
> But, I wonder is it really ok to make it default behavior. IncSearch and
> Search highlight is similar in some colorscheme and when you type ., all
> characters will be highlighted.
> I thought someone may feel it's annoying behavior.
>
Vim users. Adding an option to control this behavior might be the way
to go (except that this will introduce one more option). New Vim users
may benefit from this feature if it is enabled by default.
Regards,
Yegappan
vim-dev ML
Christian Brabandt
did you check the build failure?
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
K.Takata
I don't think it is related to this PR, because the master branch also failed with the same error.
Not sure why lua fails.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
haya14busa
It looks like #2203 will fix the build failure. Will update this pull-request to include the fix once #2203 included. (I ran CI against my fork repo and I confirmed CI passed in OSX too. haya14busa#5)
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
haya14busa
@haya14busa pushed 1 commit.
- 18261aa Add test for incremental highlight
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Codecov
Codecov Report
Merging #2198 into master will decrease coverage by
0.04%.
The diff coverage is100%.
@@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #2198 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 74.34% 74.29% -0.05% ========================================== Files 90 90 Lines 131984 132006 +22 Branches 28988 30871 +1883 ========================================== - Hits 98121 98079 -42 - Misses 33863 33923 +60 - Partials 0 4 +4
| Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| src/option.c | 84.47% <ø> (ø) |
⬆️ |
| src/search.c | 73.71% <100%> (+0.12%) |
⬆️ |
| src/ex_getln.c | 72.94% <100%> (+0.57%) |
⬆️ |
| src/memline.c | 70.81% <0%> (-3.42%) |
⬇️ |
| src/if_xcmdsrv.c | 83.63% <0%> (-0.9%) |
⬇️ |
| src/fold.c | 84.66% <0%> (-0.72%) |
⬇️ |
| src/ex_cmds2.c | 80.21% <0%> (-0.3%) |
⬇️ |
| src/term.c | 51.2% <0%> (-0.22%) |
⬇️ |
| src/message.c | 68.26% <0%> (-0.2%) |
⬇️ |
| src/if_py_both.h | 76.09% <0%> (-0.15%) |
⬇️ |
| ... and 14 more |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact),ø = not affected,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 1d68d9b...a552edd. Read the comment docs.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
haya14busa
I added test for highlight while incremental searching by runnning vim with term_start().
I cannot find a way to test highlight while searching with Vim itself because
"redraw" command while searching turn of incserach and inchlsearch highlight.
We cannot test gVim with term_start, but I think it's better than nothing :)
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
haya14busa
@haya14busa pushed 1 commit.
- 7c78384 Merge branch 'master' into incsearch-hi-all
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
haya14busa
Hi, Bram!
Could you tell me your thought about this patch?
I understand bug fixes have higher priority than new feature like this and I
won't say please merge it right now, but I want to hear your opinion and
improve this patch if needed.
(I updated the patch to fix the conflict with recent changes)
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Yegappan Lakshmanan
@yegappan commented on this pull request.
> @@ -4386,6 +4386,17 @@ A jump table for the options with a short description can be found at |Q_op|.
default now. This should work fine for most people, however if you
have any problem with it, try using on-the-spot style.
+ *'inchlsearch'* *'ihls'* *'noinchlsearch'* *'noihls'*
+'inchlsearch' 'ihls' boolean (default off)
+ global
+ {not in Vi}
+ {not available when compiled without the
+ |+extra_search| features}
+ While typing a search command, all matched strings are highlighted.
+ It works only when both 'incsearch' and 'hlsearch' are on. The type of
The help text needs to be updated. The 'hlsearch' option is not needed
to enable this feature.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Yegappan Lakshmanan
@yegappan commented on this pull request.
Few help files need to be updated to refer to this new option.
The eval.txt help file needs to be updated to include this option. Search for 'extra_search' in eval.txt.
Remove the following item from todo.txt:
Should be easy to highlight all matches with 'incsearch'. Idea by Itchyny,
2015 Feb 6.
Add some text about this feature to usr_03.txt under "TUNING SEARCHES".
Add a reference to this option in various.txt under "+extra_search".
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Bram Moolenaar
haya14busa wrote:
> Could you tell me your thought about this patch?
> I understand bug fixes have higher priority than new feature like this and I
> won't say please merge it right now, but I want to hear your opinion and
> improve this patch if needed.
>
> (I updated the patch to fix the conflict with recent changes)
I don't like adding yet another option.
I think that the combination of 'incsearch' and 'hlsearch' is
sufficient. If someone disables 'hlsearch', e.g., because they don't
like seeing more matches or it's too slow, then they most likely also
don't want it for inc-searching.
There will be a group of users who would want 'nohlsearch' but
still highlight all matches when inc-searching, but I would say this
group is too small to add another option for.
Perhaps it can even be done with an autocommand, setting 'hlsearch' when
typing the search and disabling it again afterwards.
--
CUSTOMER: You're not fooling anyone y'know. Look, isn't there something
you can do?
DEAD PERSON: I feel happy... I feel happy.
[whop]
CUSTOMER: Ah, thanks very much.
MORTICIAN: Not at all. See you on Thursday.
CUSTOMER: Right.
The Quest for the Holy Grail (Monty Python)
/// Bram Moolenaar -- Br...@Moolenaar.net -- 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 are receiving this because you commented.
Yegappan Lakshmanan
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:26 AM, Bram Moolenaar
<vim-dev...@256bit.org> wrote:
>
> haya14busa wrote:
>
>> Could you tell me your thought about this patch?
>> I understand bug fixes have higher priority than new feature like this and
>> I
>> won't say please merge it right now, but I want to hear your opinion and
>> improve this patch if needed.
>>
>> (I updated the patch to fix the conflict with recent changes)
>
> I like the feature, just wondering when exactly we should do this.
> I don't like adding yet another option.
>
> I think that the combination of 'incsearch' and 'hlsearch' is
> sufficient. If someone disables 'hlsearch', e.g., because they don't
> like seeing more matches or it's too slow, then they most likely also
> don't want it for inc-searching.
>
> There will be a group of users who would want 'nohlsearch' but
> still highlight all matches when inc-searching, but I would say this
> group is too small to add another option for.
>
I don't know whether I am in a minority group of users who
like this combination. If we are not going to add a new option,
what about enabling this by default when 'incsearch' is set?
Regards,
Yegappan
vim-dev ML
Bram Moolenaar
Yegappan wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:26 AM, Bram Moolenaar
> <vim-dev...@256bit.org> wrote:
> >
> > haya14busa wrote:
> >
> >> Could you tell me your thought about this patch?
> >> I understand bug fixes have higher priority than new feature like this and
> >> I
> >> won't say please merge it right now, but I want to hear your opinion and
> >> improve this patch if needed.
> >>
> >> (I updated the patch to fix the conflict with recent changes)
> >
> > I like the feature, just wondering when exactly we should do this.
> > I don't like adding yet another option.
> >
> > I think that the combination of 'incsearch' and 'hlsearch' is
> > sufficient. If someone disables 'hlsearch', e.g., because they don't
> > like seeing more matches or it's too slow, then they most likely also
> > don't want it for inc-searching.
> >
> > There will be a group of users who would want 'nohlsearch' but
> > still highlight all matches when inc-searching, but I would say this
> > group is too small to add another option for.
> >
>
> I don't set/like the 'hlsearch' option but I like the new feature.
> I don't know whether I am in a minority group of users who
> like this combination. If we are not going to add a new option,
> what about enabling this by default when 'incsearch' is set?
correctly then 'incsearch' might not work properly, all matches may look
similar. If 'hlsearch' is set we can assume the user has setup the
highlighting.
I'll add the CmdlineEnter and CmdlineLeave autocommand events, these are
useful for other things as well.
--
A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems.
Paul Erdos
A computer programmer is a device for turning coffee into bugs.
Bram Moolenaar
vim-dev ML
xtal8
If this patch relied on incsearch options then old behavior could not be preserved even with CmdlineEnter and CmdlineLeave events. It would be a pithy for those users who use search mostly as navigation tool.
I think idea of using hlsearch and autocommands is the best. It allows preservation of old behavior and is consistent with current current hlsearch option description.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
haya14busa
@haya14busa pushed 4 commits.
- d6d5aa2 Remove 'inchlsearch' option
- bcaefe6 Merge branch 'master' into incsearch-hi-all
- 147d165 add example configuration
- 8bc7dcc add test
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
haya14busa
Thanks for the responses!
I'll add the CmdlineEnter and CmdlineLeave autocommand events, these are
useful for other things as well.
This is really great!
Now that we have Cmdline{Enter,Leave}, I also believe combination of 'incsearch' and 'incsearch' is enough instead of adding another option.
Users can control the behavior on their own.
I updated the patch. Changed document and added one additional test (test highlight while searching with &hlsearch == false.
Christian Brabandt
augroup vimrc-incsearch-highlight
+ autocmd!
+ autocmd CmdlineEnter * :if expand('<afile>') == '/' | set hlsearch | endif
+ autocmd CmdlineLeave * :if expand('<afile>') == '/' | set nohlsearch | endif
+ augroup END
That does not work as expected. I tried this configuration when the patch was released. It does enable hlsearch when you search something (actually, only when typing the first char after entering search mode (e.g. not after / but only after you enter the first character to search for)). However, the way it works is, it will highlight the last used search pattern and not the currently entered pattern. And once we finish the search, it will be disabled.
You can try this: vim --clean -c ':h'. Enter the autocommand au CmdlineEnter * :if expand('<afile>') == '/' | set hlsearch | endif, and then do :let @/='.*'. Now enter /vim. Note, highlighting starts only after pressing v. Note also, it highlights the last search pattern .* instead of the typed one v and therefore highlights the complete text. Once you have typed vim and pressed enter the highlight vanishes, so you never actually see only vim highlighted.
Of course this is not a problem with your patch, I am just pointing out, that this does not work as expected.
BTW: You actually want rather this in the documentation: :if expand('<afile>') =~ '[/?]'
Bram Moolenaar
Christian Brabandt wrote:
> ```
> augroup vimrc-incsearch-highlight
> + autocmd!
> + autocmd CmdlineEnter * :if expand('<afile>') == '/' | set hlsearch | endif
> + autocmd CmdlineLeave * :if expand('<afile>') == '/' | set nohlsearch | endif
> + augroup END
> ```
>
> That does not work as expected. I tried this configuration when the
> patch was released. It does enable hlsearch when you search something
> (actually, only when typing the first char after entering search mode
> (e.g. not after `/` but only after you enter the first character to
> search for)). However, the way it works is, it will highlight the last
> used search pattern and not the currently entered pattern. And once we
> finish the search, it will be disabled.
> You can try this: `vim --clean -c ':h'`. Enter the autocommand `au
> and then do `:let @/='.*'`. Now enter `/vim`. Note, highlighting
> starts only after pressing `v`. Note also, it highlights the last
> search pattern `.*` instead of the typed one `v` and therefore
> highlights the complete text. Once you have typed `vim` and pressed
> enter the highlight vanishes, so you never actually see only `vim`
> highlighted.
>
> Of course this is not a problem with your patch, I am just pointing
> out, that this does not work as expected.
>
> BTW: You actually want rather this in the documentation: `:if
> expand('<afile>') =~ '[/?]'`
autocmd CmdlineEnter / set hlsearch
--
ARTHUR: I am your king!
WOMAN: Well, I didn't vote for you.
ARTHUR: You don't vote for kings.
WOMAN: Well, 'ow did you become king then?
The Quest for the Holy Grail (Monty Python)
/// 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 ///
—
haya14busa
haya14busa
@chrisbra I was confused with your report. I couldn't reproduce it nor understand what you mean. But on second thought, the report totally makes sense if I assume you didn't apply the latest attached patch. Can you confirm that you used the latest attached patch?
BTW: You actually want rather this in the documentation: :if expand('') =~ '[/?]'
You can use / for the pattern instead:
autocmd CmdlineEnter / set hlsearch
Thanks! That's nice. I updated the patch.
haya14busa
Christian Brabandt
But it does work when 'hlsearch' is always on?
Not sure what you mean with work...
mj-2017
I pulled the latest vim.git repo yesterday and it appears this patch was included (based on looking at the source files). However, I have both incsearch and hlsearch options set to On, but I don't get the new functionality provided by the patch. What am I missing?
Christian Brabandt
it is not included yet.
mj-2017
Oh, that explains it. I guess when I pull'd what I thought was this patch based on a hash of 9fbe6fb, I didn't do it correctly and apparently got one of Bram's latest patches which was of course was already in the vim pull that I had done. Um, so how can I download the latest version of this patch?
Thanks very much for the reply.
K.Takata
Um, so how can I download the latest version of this patch?
Go to this link:
https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/2198.diff
Or:
git checkout -b haya14busa-incsearch-hi-all master
git pull https://github.com/haya14busa/vim.git incsearch-hi-all
mj-2017
Thanks very much for the link!
Christian Brabandt
You don't have to checkout the contributors repository. You can also switch directly to a pull request using something like this:
git fetch origin pull/<ID>/head:branch
git checkout branch
Now you can build and test yourself.
See also the github documentation:
https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/
haya14busa
haya14busa
Hi!
I added tests for incremental highlight of <C-g> and <C-t> (I found that I forgot to write them...).
I think the tests covered enough cases for this patch now.
git fetch origin pull//head:branch
git checkout branch
bwt, this works well for first time, but there is no tracking information (no
upstream branch) for the created branch, so you cannot update the branch by
simple git pull command. Instead you need to run this following command.
$ git pull origin pull/2198/head
Not sure what you mean with work...
Work like the GIF I pasted on the top comment?
Sorry for repeating it, but I assume you didn't use the latest patch.
Can you confirm that you used the latest patch?
If your report is true, it's certainly the problem of this patch, not the problem of the autocmd.
So, I want to confirm that and want to fix if the problem is reproducible with latest code.
Thanks!
Christian Brabandt
Sorry for repeating it, but I assume you didn't use the latest patch.
that was unrelated to your patch and was only a comment that setting the 'hlsearch' setting on CmdlineEnter/ CmdlineLeave autocommands won't work as expected.
haya14busa
Ok, then what is your expectation?
Last pattern should be highlighted right after pressing search command (/) instead of first character?
Or, you mentioned
it highlights the last search pattern .* instead of the typed one v
but, without my patch, it's totally expected behavior. Incremental searching won't change the last search pattern.
haya14busa
autocmd CmdlineEnter [/\?] :set hlsearch | redraw
By calling :redraw, last pattern will be highlighted right after pressing / or ?.
Other behavior you reported seems expected behavior. When ':set hlsearchand:set incsearch`, last pattern is highlighted same as before. The autocmd just turn on and off 'hlsearch' when entering/leaving cmdline.
haya14busa
Thank you for including it! ✨
duff
@duff commented on this pull request.
> @@ -4447,7 +4447,17 @@ A jump table for the options with a short description can be found at |Q_op|. match may not be found. This is to avoid that Vim hangs while you are typing the pattern. The highlighting can be set with the 'i' flag in 'highlight'. - See also: 'hlsearch'. + When 'hlsearch' is on, all matched strings are highlighted too while typing + a search command. See also: 'hlsearch'. + If you don't want turn 'hlsearch' on, but want to highlight all matches + while searching, you can turn on and off 'hlsearch' with autocmd. + Example: > + augroup vimrc-incsearch-highlight
Thank you for this option! It works great!
xtal8
The augroup provided in description of 'incsearch' doesn't work on Windows.
Christian Brabandt
yeah, it looks like this:
autocmd CmdlineEnter [/\?] :set hlsearch
does not match on Windows. However this works:
autocmd CmdlineEnter /,\? :set hlsearch
autocmd CmdlineLeave /,\? :set nohlsearch
xtal8
Why is backslash needed? It works without it.
lacygoill
@xtal8 I think that the question mark has a special meaning inside the pattern used in an autocmd. It matches any character. But here, you don't want the special meaning, you want a literal question mark. The one standing for a search command line you entered after pressing ? while in normal mode. Otherwise ? would match all symbols standing for any Ex command line (see :h cmdwind-char).
xtal8
I think it's used in a sense of wildcards not patterns. But when I tried to use autocommand with only ? (without backslahs) hlsearch wasn't enabled inside a search started with /. That's why I asked.
David Ben Knoble
Hi all, I've noticed that after updating to vim 8.0.1250, my search behavior was a little weird. I think it's related to this patch, but it seems
/\v
matches every character in a file, where it didn't previously. When I got to search now (using my nnoremap / /\v), the entire file is highlighted by incsearch and hlsearch until I start typing my pattern. Further, if I hit <CR>, pressing n will simply take me character-by-character through the file.
This didn't occur before. Is this considered intended behavior (i.e. that an empty search pattern with the very-magic flag is a match for every character?
h_east
2017-11-18(Sat) 14:40:37 UTC+9 David Ben Knoble:
> Hi all, I've noticed that after updating to vim 8.0.1250, my search behavior was a little weird. I think it's related to this patch, but it seems
>
> /\v
>
> matches every character in a file, where it didn't previously. When I got to search now (using my nnoremap / /\v), the entire file is highlighted by incsearch and hlsearch until I start typing my pattern. Further, if I hit <CR>, pressing n will simply take me character-by-character through the file.
>
> This didn't occur before. Is this considered intended behavior (i.e. that an empty search pattern with the very-magic flag is a match for every character?
Your reported issue is discussed in following thread.
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/vim_dev/YlKJq45uYY8/discussion
--
Best regards,
Hirohito Higashi (h_east)
duff
@benknoble I saw the same behavior. For now at least, I removed my nnoremap / /\v mapping.
K.Takata
It is discussed at #2337.