Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!bu.edu!hsdndev!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.editors
Subject: Re: Re: vi for power users
Message-ID: <7426:Dec1621:57:0990@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 16 Dec 90 21:57:09 GMT
References: <4672@umbc3.UMBC.EDU> <7150:Dec1309:42:4690@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1990Dec14.174605.19649@ddsw1.MCS.COM>
Organization: IR
Lines: 30

In article <1990Dec14.174605.19649@ddsw1.MCS.COM> dattier@ddsw1.MCS.COM (David W. Tamkin) writes:
> |   map ^A :s/$/ $/^M$r 74^V|? ^Ms^M^[$xx0
> For both forms, why are things done the long way?
> Why ":s/$/  /^M" instead of "A  ^["?

Because that will fail miserably for lines between about 72 and 80
characters. My point was to present a *reliable* line splitter.

> Why "? ^M" instead of "F ", as long as that the space will be on that line?

Because I wrote the macro and I don't use F. You're right, F is better
so that the previous search string stays intact.

> Why "s^M^[" instead of "r^M"?

I've seen versions of vi where r doesn't behave properly with a newline.

> "r^M" works fine in my own reformatting macro.
>     (I won't post it because it has other bugs.)

Exactly. My point was to present a *reliable* line splitter, something
that everybody could use without having to worry about bugs.

> Why "xx" instead of "2x"?  This is a macro in one's .exrc, so saying that
>     "`xx' is easier to type every time you use it than `2x'" doesn't count.

On what objective basis is 2x better than xx? It is objectively worse on
at least one basis: it doesn't work. Notice the $ in $xx.

---Dan