I'm using vim-abolish plugin for coercion and wanted to try abolish functions for case changing in substitution eg.:
:s#FOO_FOO#\=Abolish.dashcase(\1)#
I've checked docs but there is no info about using it from plugin functions. How can i make them available in vim? Seems like they are almost ready to use here, but i don't know how to make it:
https://github.com/tpope/vim-abolish/blob/master/plugin/abolish.vim
\1 can only be used in a regular substitution. Since you have opted for an expression, you must use :help submatch():
:s#FOO_FOO#\=Abolish.dashcase(submatch(<your number here>))#
See :help sub-replace-special.
Related
The codebase I'm working on requires standard comments around any modifications that we make:
// -----------ABCD---------------
and then
// ----------\ABCD---------------
What's the best way to map a short combination of keys like -abcd and \abcd to generate these longer strings?
The simplest, built-in :help abbreviations:
inoreab abcd // -----------ABCD---------------
inoreab abcD // ----------\ABCD---------------
Why did I choose different triggers? There are some rules (documented as "three types of abbreviations" under the above help link) for the allowed keys; the easiest is that it's all keyword characters.
If you insist on those exact triggers, you'd have to fiddle with the 'iskeyword' option (which can affect syntax highlighting and motions!), or switch to :inoremap. The downside of that is that you won't see the typed characters until any ambiguity has been resolved (try it; you'll see what I mean).
ABCD is just a dummy; I need dynamic text here
If multiple abbreviations won't do, you'll need snippets.
snippets are like the built-in :abbreviate on steroids, usually with parameter insertions, mirroring, and multiple stops inside them. One of the first, very famous (and still widely used) Vim plugins is snipMate (inspired by the TextMate editor); unfortunately, it's not maintained any more; though there is a fork. A modern alternative (that requires Python though) is UltiSnips. There are more, see this list on the Vim Tips Wiki and this comparison by Mark Weber.
A snippet would look like this (snipMate syntax):
snippet abcd
// -----------${1:ABCD}---------------
${2:content}
// ----------\$1---------------
${3}
I am trying to use substitute command in vim to enclose all occurences of a particular pattern
\cite{author1}
\cite{author2}
with
(\cite{author1})
(\cite{author2})
Based on other answers in stack exchangeI used the following vim command
%s/\\cite{(\w\+)}/(\\cite{\1})/g
But, no luck. It says "no matches found". I put two back slashes, one of which is supposed to be the escape character. Kindly help.
I know I could use some other editor and finish the job, but I want to know my mistake. Thank you.
please escape ()
%s/\\cite{\(\w\+\)}/(\\cite{\1})/g
You do not need a capture group to get the entire match. You can use \0 or & for the whole match in the replacement portion of your substitution.
:%s/\\cite{\w\+}/(&)/g
If you do want to use a capture group, then you need to escape the capture group/parenthesis.
:%s/\(foo\)/(\1)/g
For more help see:
:h :s%
:h /magic
As mentioned, normally you need escape the parentheses.
You can use very magic mode (\v) to make the regex simpler; removing the need to escape lots of the regex parts, including the parentheses for capturing:
%s/\v(\\cite\{\w+\})/(\1)/g
Knowing what every sign in a regular expression does in vim is sometimes very
difficult, especially for all the modes and configuration variables that this
depends on. For that reason, it is very important to have visual feedback about
what text are we really matching in any moment while crafting regular
expressions.
If you work with neovim, there is a special option called inccommand that you
can enable to live preview the matches and substitution. That way you can figure
out you errors more quickly. This feature is very likely to be included also in
vim in the future, but independently of that, you can also use simple vim to
give you visual feedback if you enable the option incsearch.
With incsearch set, you can watch the matches of / and ? while you write them
just to be sure that the pattern is correct. Later you can exploit a nice
feature from the substitution: if you leave the first section empty, the last
search will be used.
So you could first make the search:
/\\cite{\w\+}/(&)/g
In the meantime, vim will be showing you the matched text visually. Once you
are sure that the pattern is correct press enter, and finally type:
:%s//(\1)<Enter>
Also, in case you want something more powerful than this simple hack, you can go
for my plugin Extend.vim, that can
do that and much more with great visual feedback.
I'm new to Vim and curious how to highlight a function call after the function has been defined. As an example, in the SublimeText version, totalForArray is green when it is defined, as well as when it is called on line 12. This is what my Vim looks like imgur.com/q2WMQ4d, and I'm wondering how to make totalForArray highlighted when it's called.
An improvement on Vitor's regex matching.
This will highlight nested function calls while respecting highlighting for keywords like while, if, for, etc... and also allows for whitespace between function name and parenthesis
e.g. myFunction (int argc) { ... }
syn match dFunction "\zs\(\k\w*\)*\s*\ze("
hi link dFunction Function
Vim's syntax parsing usually only colors the function definition, because that one is easy to locate with a regular expression. For function calls, it would have to maintain a list of detected functions.
There are plugins that extend syntax highlighting with such a list, usually taken from the tags database. For example, the easytags.vim plugin performs automatic tags updates and can highlight those via the :HighlightTags command.
As a simpler alternative to what was proposed by #Ingo, you can also define a syntax to match any keyword that is directly followed by a parentheses:
syn match jsFunction "\<\k\+\ze("
hi link jsFunction Function
Searching in github I was also able to find the vim-javascript plugin, which appears to have various extensions to the default Javascript syntax included in Vim. In particular, it contains the following syntax definition:
syntax match jsFuncCall /\k\+\%(\s*(\)\#=/
This will implement the same syntax highlight I described before, but by using this plugin you might also benefit from other improvements that are included in it.
I have two question about understand those vim script. please give some help,
Question 1:
I download a.vim plugin, and i try to read this plugin, how to understand the below variable definition? the first line I can understand, but the second line, I don't know exactly "g:alternateExtensions_{'aspx.cs'}" means.
" E.g. let g:alternateExtensions_CPP = "inc,h,H,HPP,hpp"
" let g:alternateExtensions_{'aspx.cs'} = "aspx"
Question 2:
how to understand "SID" before the function name, using like below function definition and function call.
function! <SID>AddAlternateExtensionMapping(extension, alternates)
//omit define body
call <SID>AddAlternateExtensionMapping('h',"c,cpp,cxx,cc,CC")
call <SID>AddAlternateExtensionMapping('H',"C,CPP,CXX,CC")
thanks for you kindly help.
let g:alternateExtensions_{'aspx.cs'} = "aspx"
That is an inline expansion of a Vimscript expression into a variable name, a rather obscure feature that is rarely used since Vim version 7. See :help curly-braces-names for details. It is usually used to interpolate a variable, not a string literal like here ('aspx.cs'). Furthermore, this here yields an error, because periods are forbidden in variable names. Newer plugins would use a List or Dictionary variable, but those data types weren't available when a.vim was written.
To avoid polluting the function namespace, plugin-internal functions should be script-local, i.e. have the prefix s:. To invoke these from a mapping, the special <SID> prefix has to be used instead of s:, because <SID> internally gets translated into something that keeps the script's ID, whereas the pure s:, when executed as part of the mapping, has lost its association to the script that defined it.
Some plugin authors don't fully understand this unfortunate and accidental complexity of Vim's scoping implementation either, and they put the <SID> prefix also in front of the function name (which works, too). Though it's slightly more correct and recommended to write it like this:
" Define and invoke script-local function.
function! s:AddAlternateExtensionMapping(extension, alternates)
...
call s:AddAlternateExtensionMapping('h',"c,cpp,cxx,cc,CC")
" Only in a mapping, the special <SID> prefix is actually necessary.
nmap <Leader>a :call <SID>AddAlternateExtensionMapping('h',"c,cpp,cxx,cc,CC")
<SID> is explained in :help <SID>:
When defining a function in a script, "s:" can be prepended to the name to
make it local to the script. But when a mapping is executed from outside of
the script, it doesn't know in which script the function was defined. To
avoid this problem, use "<SID>" instead of "s:". The same translation is done
as for mappings. This makes it possible to define a call to the function in
a mapping.
When a local function is executed, it runs in the context of the script it was
defined in. This means that new functions and mappings it defines can also
use "s:" or "<SID>" and it will use the same unique number as when the
function itself was defined. Also, the "s:var" local script variables can be
used.
That number is the one you see on the left when you do :scriptnames, IIRC.
I try to add some syntax highlighting for javascript to vim, but I keep running into one problem: when characters are already highlighted, they seem to be completely ignored by all other regular expressions.
For example, I tried to add syntax highlighting for the argument list of a function. While creating the right rexex I disabled the syntax highlighting for the function keyword, such that it was easier to see what my regex did. I ended up with the following (working) regex:
syn match javaScriptArguments "[(=\:\s,]function.\{-}(\zs.\{-}\ze)"
However, as soon as I enabled the highlighting for the function keyword again, this line doesn't work anymore. It seems that vim simply excludes everything which is already highlighted, and thus it won't find any matches for the regex above, even though it won't result in characters being highlighted twice.
How can I solve/work around this problem?
Syntax definitions must be contained for them to match inside other syntax items. Find all the gruesome details at :help syn-contains.
In your case, you're relying on a look-before of the "function" keyword via \zs. In my experience, that's bound to cause problems, but may turn out to be unneccessary once you use contained. In general, it is difficult to extend an existing syntax definition without modifying the original script (which I suppose is what you're intending to do). Have a look at :help :syn-containedin and :help :syn-nextgroup.