The m normal command accepts a letter just after it to set a "letter" mark.
I would like to create a similar command that works across tabs... But my problem is with the binding : Is there a simple way to bind for example M<letter> to a function or a command or should I manually repeat all the possibilities ?
As romainl has already said, no.
Covering this for good measure (and in case someone else comes along later), you can only practically map upper-case letters. As is outlined in the documentation, lower-case marks are only valid within a single file. Upper-case ones, that the Vim docs calls "file marks", are valid from anywhere. Unless you have some dark magic function to resolve ambiguous file marks, you probably only need a single for loop mapping the upper-case letters, if you're going with the brute-force option.
That said, there are a couple alternatives here as well.
As far as I know, the only "dynamic" bit of a command is a count (or a range, but unless you want to map characters to a number (and handle ranges and other fun stuff:tm:), I don't recommend this approach:
" The <C-U> is required for all uses. If you want a function,
" you'd need :<C-U>call YourFunction()<cr>
nnoremap M :<C-U>echom v:count<cr>
See also :h v:count, which states:
Note: the <C-U> is required to remove the line range that you get when typing ':' after a count.
You can then run 26M, decode v:count as Z, and then do whatever fancy lookup from there.
The second alternative, and the one proposed by romainl and by far the most used one in cases like this (source: experience and lots of code browsing), is using a for loop to brute-force map letters:
for i in range(char2nr('A'), char2nr('Z'))
exec 'nnoremap M' . nr2char(i) ':echo "This is where the appropriate function call goes"<cr>'
endfor
Which produces all 26 mappings.
And the final approach is abusing getchar(). This means a single mapping, but at the expense of doing additional processing:
func! Func()
let c = getchar()
echo c
" Character processing (the `echo` isn't required) here
endfunc
nnoremap M :call Func()<cr>
You can decide which works for you, but I strongly suggest preferring option 2, as this gives you map timeouts and clear definitions, and more obvious conflict detection.
Related
I found that I often do refactor:
def function(param1, param2, (...), paramK):
to
def function(
param1,
param2,
(...),
paramK,
):
And tried to write mapping for it.
I started with
command! Split normal! qqqf(a<cr><esc>qqf s<cr><esc>#qq#qf)i<cr><esc>
qqq - reset content of macro q.
f(a<cr><esc> - find bracket, make newline and return to normal mode.
qq - start to record macro q.
f s<cr><esc> - change space to newline.
#q - run macro recursively.
q#q - end recording and run.
f)i<cr><esc> - add last newline before closing bracket.
My idea was, that macro will fail when it won't find space, but something is wrong with that. It raised some questions.
1) How can I check if some motion succeed? e.g. How to check if there is a space in current line?
2) Is there better idea to achieve what I want? Maybe some plugin or clear function?
3) What is wrong with my idea? When I run this combination from hand it works, but while calling :Split it doesn't.
Regarding why it doesn't work quite like it does when you type it manually:
When you type normal! <esc>, Vim parses this as "type the letters <, e, s, c, >". You might be able to insert a literal escape key there by typing <c-v><esc>, but that can look a bit weird in the configuration. Instead, a better way is to use the :exe command (:help :exe):
exe "normal! \<esc>"
The \<esc> gets interpolated by the string to be a literal escape key. So, the exe "normal! ..." gets translated to an invocation to normal! with the keys you're looking for. You also need to escape <cr> the same way. I'd also use \<space> instead of , I'm not entirely sure if a normal space is going to work here. After that, hopefully, you should get the same results as when you type it manually.
As for the actual problem you're trying to solve, I do have a plugin for that: splitjoin. By default, it splits your example like this:
def function(param1,
param2,
(...),
paramK):
pass
But there's a setting you can change to adjust it to your liking. Alternatively, from Jordan Running's link, it seems you could also use the argwrap plugin, which might be more reliable for argument-splitting in particular (splitjoin handles a wider variety of cases, but maybe doesn't do as good with arguments? Not sure.)
Answers:
I don't understand the question. You can search for spaces with f or with the / syntax. Why do you want to do this?
Yes. See below.
The vimrc syntax is super different from normal vim syntax. I don't know why and I don't fully understand it.
Code:
nnoremap <C-r> :s/, */,\r /g<cr>:s/)/\r)<cr>:nohl<cr>
remaps ctrl+r to search for a comma followed by 0 or more spaces and replace that with a comma, newline, and tab. then searches for ) and replaces that with newline and ). then undoes the highlighting it just did.
To enter a literal tab instead of 4 spaces, you'll have to type CtrlVtab in place of the 4 spaces you see in the command
Some Vim commands could have expression as prefix, like 100j or 20k, how to map the entire command? I want to call a Vim function before invoking the given command.
EDIT: I want to preserve the previous input number for j/k as repeat times, the calling function might be unrelated. For example, I want to do some bookkeeping before every j or k command, but I don't want to break the number prefix.
Every problem can be solved by adding another layer of indirection
except the problem of having too many layers of indirection
- Misquote of David Wheeler and Kevlin Henney
So how are we going to solve this? Add a layer of indirection!
One way to do this by is using a map expression which calls a function that does the "book keeping" and returns the command back.
let s:bookkeeping = {}
function! s:bookkeeping(count, cmd)
let s:bookkeeping[a:cmd] = get(s:bookkeeping, a:cmd, 0) + a:count
return a:cmd
endfunction
nnoremap <expr> j <SID>bookkeeping(v:count1, 'j')
Personally I think their is little to gain from gathering data on such commands as their is no context however it is probably good to see how to do an map expression. See :h :map-<expr> for more information.
I come upon one scenario when editing a file in vim and I still haven't found a way to do it quickly in vim way. When editing a call of a function, I offently put my arguments in a wrong order.
anyFunction(arg2, arg1)
When arriving on this situation, I have to find arg2 / delete it / append it before the ')' / deal with the ', ' / etc.
Isn't it a better way to this task quickly ? I am open to any idea (macro/ shortcut / plugin) even if I'd rather have a 'vim only' way of doing this
You need two things:
A text object to quickly select an argument (as they aren't always that simple like in your example). argtextobj plugin (my improved fork here) does this.
Though you can use delete + visual mode + paste + go back + paste, a plugin to swap text makes this much easier. My SwapText plugin or the already mentioned exchange plugin both do that job.
put this mapping in your _vimrc.
" gw : Swap word with next word
nmap <silent> gw :s/\(\%#\w\+\)\(\_W\+\)\(\w\+\)/\3\2\1/<cr><c-o><c-l>
then in normal mode with the cursor anywhere in arg1 type gw to swap parameters
anyFunction(arg1, arg2)
Explanation:-
arg1 the separator (here a comma) and arg2 are put into regexp memories 1 2 3
the substitute reverses them to 3 2 1
Control-O return to last position
Control-L redraw the screen
Note that the separator is any non-alphanumeric character or string e,g whitespace
I actually made a plugin to deal with a exact situation called argumentative.vim. (Sorry for the plug.)
Argumentative.vim provides the following mappings:
[, and ], motions which will go to the previous or next argument
<, and >, to shift an argument left or right
i, and a, argument text objects. e.g. da,, ci, or yi,
So with this plugin you move to the argument in question and then do a <, or >, as many times as needed. It can also take a count e.g. 2>,.
If you have Tim Pope's excellent repeat.vim plugin installed <, and >, become repeatable with the . command.
I would recommend a plugin: vim-exchange for that:
https://github.com/tommcdo/vim-exchange
This is a perfect use for a regular expression search and replace.
You want to find "anyFunction(", then swap anything up to the ',' with anything from the ',' to the ')'. This is fairly straightforward, using [^,]* for "anything up to the ','" and [^)]* for "anything up to the ')'". Use \(...\) to capture each thing, and \1, \2 to refer to those things in the replacement:
:s#anyFunction(\s*\([^,]*\),\s*\([^)]*\)#anyFunction(\2, \1#g
Note how I use \s* to allow any whitespace between the "anyFunction(" and the first thing, and also between the ',' and the second thing.
If you want this to be able to span multiple lines, you can use \_s instead of \s, and capture the whitespace if you want to maintain the multi-line format:
:s#anyFunction(\(\_s*\)\([^,]*\),\(\_s*\)\([^)]*\)#anyFunction(\1\4,\3\2#g
There is also a multi-line variant of [...] collections, for example \_[^,] meaning "anything (even a new line) except for a ',' " which you could use in the pattern if your use case demands it.
For details, consult the help topics for: /\s, /\_s, /\1, /\(, and /[.
If you want a more general-purpose mapping to use at every location, you can use the cursor position in your regular expression, rather than keying off the function name. The cursor position in a regular expression is matched using \%# as demonstrated here: http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Exchanging_adjacent_words
Similar to what Peter Rincker suggested (Argumentative), sideways also does what you describe.
I know that when you define a function in vim, you can use the range keyword so that users can say:
:-5,+5call MyFunction()
And then your function gets a:firstline and a:lastline.
What I want is something similar, but more like the traditional vi way of combining a command with a movement, so that 'd ' deletes a space, 'dw' deletes a word, 'd2w' deletes two words, 'd2j' deletes three lines, etc. Assuming my function gets mapped to some input-mode character sequence, is there any way to make it accept similar variable-length inputs, and then modify that text?
Just to be a little more clear, suppose I want to define a function to wrap <b> tags around existing text. We'll say that function is mapped to ;b. I want users to be able to say ';bw' to bold one word, or ';bf.' to bold everything to the end of the sentence, or whatever, with all the flexibility that vim provides to built-in commands.
If I understand what you're asking, then all you do is include the char argument in your mapping. For example:
map d :call MyFunction('d')<cr>
map dw :call MyFunction('dw')<cr>
map d2w :call MyFunction('d2w')<cr>
" Of course these would be terrible mappings because they
" are already mapped to important Vim functions
The way mappings work is that if you "overspecify" a char like 'd' above so that it is usable either by itself or as a prefix for longer command, Vim will wait briefly (for timeoutlen)after you press 'd' to see if you're going to press another character. (This depends on thetimeout option being set to true, which is the default.) If you don't press another character, Vim will execute the 'd' mapping. If you do it will call the more complex mapping. See :h map-commands generally and :h map-typing for more.
Note: After your clarification I think what you want is to create a custom 'operator' function that you can use to operate on buffer areas defined by Vim motions. See :h map-operator for info on how to do this.
I am using Vim to read through a lot of C and Perl code containing many single letter variable names.
It would be nice to have some command to change the name of a variable to something more meaningful while I’m in the process of reading the code, so that I could read the rest of it faster.
Is there some command in Vim which could let me do this quickly?
I don’t think regexes would work because:
the same single letter name might have different purposes in different scoping blocks; and
the same combination of letters could be part of another longer variable name, a string literal, or a comment.
Are there any known solutions?
The following is how to rename a variable which is defined in the current scope {}.
Move your cursor to the variable usage. Press gd. Which means - move cursor to the definition.
Now Press [{ - this will bring you to the scope begin.
Press V - will turn on Visual Line selection.
Press % - will jump to the opposite } thus will select the whole scope.
Press :s/ - start of the substitute command.
<C-R>/ - will insert pattern that match variable name (that name you were on before pressing gd).
/newname/gc<CR> - will initiate search and replace with confirmation on every match.
Now you have to record a macros or even better - map a key.
Here are the final mappings:
" For local replace
nnoremap gr gd[{V%::s/<C-R>///gc<left><left><left>
" For global replace
nnoremap gR gD:%s/<C-R>///gc<left><left><left>
Put this to your .vimrc or just execute.
After this pressing gr on the local variable will bring you to :s command where you simply should enter new_variable_name and press Enter.
I know it's an old question, and #mykola-golubyev's way obviously IS the best answer for the particular case in the OP question (which, I assume is going through obfuscated code where you're likely to have multiple blocks with same var names); but with the question name like that many people coming here from google searches probably look for less situation-specific ways to rename variables in VIM -- and those can be more concise
I'm surprised no one suggested this way:
* :s// NEWNAME /gc
The * is the same as gn - search the next occurrence of the word under the cursor AND make it the last searched pattern; you can then omit the search pattern in the substitute command and VIM will assume that last one is the pattern to search for.
For small amounts of var copies, here's an even quicker one:
* cw NEWNAME <esc> then repeat n. for other occurrences
* is search for occurrences, cw is change word, n goes to the next occurrence of the last searched term and . repeats the last command (which is now change word to NEWNAME)
(Credits for me knowing all this go to #doomedbunnies on Reddit)
Another cool trick: (credits to #nobe4)
* cgn NEWNAME <esc> then repeat . for other occurrences
cgn is "change whatever is the result of (find next occurrence)". Now that this is the last command, you don't need the n to go to the next occurrence, so fewer strokes again, and, more importantly, no need to alternate n and .. But, obviously, this one has the drawback of not having a way to skip an occurrence.
Here are some benefits of these over other similar approaches, or language-specific plugins with refactoring support:
no command mapping, no fiddling with .vimrc(or init.vim), so you can use it in any VIM copy you come across (e.g. a quick task on some VPS or your friend's machine where configuring VIM your way would defeat the purpose of 'quick')
using * or gn for word selection is very quick -- just one keystroke (well, let's say 1.5)
using * or gn makes sure you don't get any matches inside other words, just as :%s/<C-R>//gc does. Beats typing the :%s/\<OLDNAME\>/NEWNAME/gc by hand: I personally tend to forget to use the \< things to limit matches to whole words only.
Not using a scope will only result in a few extra strokes of n to skip unwanted matches -- probably even fewer than the extra strokes needed to limit the scope to a certain code block. Under normal circumstances, your variables are most likely somewhat localised to a certain code block anyway.
AFAIK, there is no actual refactoring support in VIM. When doing a rename with the intent of a refactor I usually take the following precautions:
Limit the scope of the change my using marks.
When entering the regex, bracket the name with \< and >. This will make it match an entire word which reduces the types of incorrect renames that will occur.
Don't do a multiline replace to reduce chances of a bad replace
Look through the code diff carefully if it's anything other than a small change.
My end change looks something like this
:'a,'bs/\<foo\>/bar
I would love to be wrong about there not being a refactoring tool for VIM but I haven't seen it.
Put this in your .vimrc
" Function to rename the variable under the cursor
function! Rnvar()
let word_to_replace = expand("<cword>")
let replacement = input("new name: ")
execute '%s/\(\W\)' . word_to_replace . '\(\W\)/\1' . replacement . '\2/gc'
endfunction
Call it with :call Rnvar()
expand("<cword>") gets the word under the cursor. The search string uses % for file-scope, and the \(\W\) patterns look for non-word characters at the boundary of the word to replace, and save them in variables \1 and \2 so as to be re-inserted in the replacement pattern.
You could use the 'c' modifier in the global search and replace that would ask you for confirmation for each replace. It would take longer but it might work for a non-humongous code file:
%s/\$var/\$foo/gc
The c stands for confirm.
In c, you may be able to make some progress using cscope. It makes an attempt at understanding syntax, so would have a chance of knowing when the letter was a variable.
If this is across multiple files, you may consider taking a look at sed. Use find to grab your files and xargs plus sed for a replace. Say you want to replace a with a_better_name in all files matching *.c, you could do
find . -name "*.c" | xargs sed -i -e 's/a/a_better_name/g'
Bear in mind that this will replace ALL occurrences of a, so you may want a more robust regex.