I am using vim with Pymode to write python source code. I have the come across some strange behaviour which is intermittent but very annoying.
If I am in insert mode and type a full stop (e.g. self.method()), whilst typing self vim prints at the bottom
-- Keyword completion (^N^P) The only match
As soon as I type the full stop vim seems to freeze momentarily, then
-- INSERT -- appears at the bottom, but my cursor is now on the full stop, so that when I write method() it actually appears behind the full stop. I keep having to go back and move the full stop.
I can't figure out when it happens and when it doesn't, when I open a new file it doesn't happen straight away.
Any ideas on what may be causing this? I have only noticed it recently.
This is a problem caused by some combination of pymode and rope. Either way putting
let g:pymode_rope_lookup_project = 0
in your vimrc solves it apparently. See here for the pymode issue.
Related
I am using vim for quite some time now, but several times per day I accidentally encounter an inconvenience by hitting ESC too early.
Assume I am editing the following file:
I want to change 'house' in this line.
'house' should stay like this.
This 'house' should become 'home'
The other 'house' should also change.
I want to change house to home in all lines except the second one. (In this simple example it would easy to write a :s command and perform the task, but usually the task is more specific and manual replacements are quicker and less error prone.) I navigate to the first occurrence of house, press cw, type hone, and hit ESC. After hitting ESC I realize that by accident I typed the letter n instead of m.
I could navigate to the next occurrence of house and hit . to repeat the faulty replacement. In this case I have to fix all hones and replace the n by m afterwards.
I could fix the mistake immediately, but then I can not repeat the same house->home replacement, since . would repeat the n->m replacement.
All of this would be no problem, if I had spotted the mistake before hitting ESC. My question is, if there is a way to undo leaving the insert mode, such that . will repeat both actions? Or similarly, is there a way to tell . to repeat the last to operations?
(Of course this sounds like recording a macro, but since I end up in this situation by mistake, I have not started a macro recording.)
As far as I am concerned, there's no command history of vim in that you could repeat the last two operations.
However, there's a plugin that could help you accomplish that. It's called the RepeatLast.vim plugin to address this exact requirement. It provides a 2\. key binding. The cost for using that plugin and how the plugin actually works is that... it actually enables macro recording all the time. But if you could live with that, it should deal with this sort of situation pretty fine.
I have been driven crazy for years with Vim's behavior of throwing away input characters. I start vim like this:
$ vim file.c
and then immediately begin typing commands. However, Vim discards some of those characters, causing the wrong action to take place.
Is there something we can put in the .vimrc to solve this issue?
Vim should be able to change the TTY to raw mode without flushing buffered input.
Update: the issue is more precisely characterized, thanks to the following investigation method. I created a script called delayvim which contains:
#!/bin/sh
sleep 2.0
vim "$#"
Now during this two second pause I can type something like iabc<ESC> and then when Vim comes up, everything is cool: the command is processed, abc is inserted and Vim pops back into command mode, with the cursor backed up over the c. Thus, it is not simply flushing the TTY input buffer.
However, if I keep typing during this delay, for instance iabcdefghijk..., it will sometimes lose a letter or two of the alphabet that is typed right around the time when the sleep terminates and the editor launches. For instance, here is the result of one trial I just performed:
abcdefghilmn_
~
~
Where are jk, oops? I am sure I typed them. I didn't type very fast; my cadence was around 4-5 strokes per second, yet two consecutive events disappeared.
Basically, it might be trying to interrogate the terminal, and in the process discarding the input that is mixed up in the response. Or it could be a combination of reading some of the prior input, then flushing the input buffer and losing the rest.
2 points that might help:
1) are you being sure to hit i first, to enter input mode, so that all characters you type afterward should go ahead and be seen in your buffer (on the screen?). Otherwise the letters you type will be processed as commands, which will often do nothing, especially if you're starting an empty file.
Note that a and o are other common commands for telling vim that you are about to begin inserting text starting with the next keystroke.
2) In case the reason on your system has to do with speed, you can look for options to change what happens at startup. For example, if you put this in your .vimrc file
autocmd VimEnter * :sleep 5
Then after processing other startup files, vim or gvim will literally do nothing for 5 seconds before showing your file on the screen. On my system, I was able to type iabcdef during those 5 seconds and when the time was up, I did see abcdef entered into my text file.
If your file was not empty, beware, as (depending on your settings) your vim installation might be kindly returning you to the last place you were editing inside the file, and you will have inserted the text there, instead of at the start.
If this doesn't work, you could try to find other things vim can do (on the web, or using :help from within vim) and program it using autocmd to happen at startup to see if it helps.
I sometimes encounter the following behaviour when editing large files in vim (it only appears to occur with > 500 lines).
When creating a sentence in insert mode occasionally a character will be repeated on screen (the v in visual):
Changing to normal mode and moving to the line below removes the errant letter (the v is removed):
The closest issue I could find while searching for a solution was described here - in my case setting the TERM variable to xterm-color (as opposed to the current setting of xterm-256color) was not effective.
Any suggestions for how to debug this would be appreciated.
As suggested by Holloway, it was related to a plugin. In my case, when following the install instructions for GitGutter, I had reduced the updatetime to be 250ms. I was able to resolve my issue by increasing this (set updatetime=2500). The plugin is a little less responsive, but it's still extremely useful and I no longer get the repeat errors.
I have started working on a huge PHP application that has thousands of lines of code in each file, with lots of huge if blocks, classes, and functions all existing in the same file. I'm not the only dev working on it, so I cannot refactor!
I have tried using the Tags List plugin but it does not really help. Is there any way to have VIM respect only a particular code block, and ignore the rest of the file? I am hoping for some or all of these features:
Enable line numbering only for the current code block, starting from 1 at the line containing the opening {, and showing no numbering for lines preceding it or after the closing }.
Searching with / would be restricted only to the block in question.
I am thinking along the lines of selecting the current block and editing it in a new buffer when enabling the mode, then replacing the existing block with the edited block when exiting the mode. However, I am having trouble actually implementing this feature. My current version is this:
map <F7> <Esc>mO<C-V>aBy:new<Return>p:set nu<Return>:set ft=php<Return>ggi<?php<Return><Esc>
map <F8> <Esc>ggdd<C-V>aBx:bp<Return>`O<C-V>aBp
However, this has several issues, such as the inability to perform incremental saves.
I would be very surprised if Vim allows the kind of line numbering you ask for.
This plugin (and 1 or 2 similar ones IIRC) allows you to visually select a region of your current file, work on it in another buffer and put everything back in its place in the original file on :w.
Even if it's not the solution you are wanting, I think the following can help you to solve your problem.
You can use phpfolding plugin, which folds by PHP syntax (functions, classes, methods, PhpDoc...)
You can then select a fold by pressing v$ over the closed fold and execute whatever you want with :whatever. For example, :s/this/self/g to substitute all this for self in the fold. When you press :, vim will automatically add '<,'> to denote following command it's only for the visually selected text.
Smething just happened in the last 20 minutes or so to my vim. I must have hit something, but I can't figure it out, and nothing will get it back to the 'real' behaviour.
I've always used : to jump to a line number. Now, when I hit : then a number - (1-9), vim instead goes in to "insert" mode and inserts a letter. (1=q, 2=r, 3=s, 4=t, 5=w, etc.)
Trying to search around for this is worse than looking for a needle in a haystack!
Any ideas as to what sort of secret "mode" I've enabled? And better yet, how I might get back to normality?
Thanks!
Not sure what you've done there but you can also jump to a specific line number by entering the line number and then hitting G (Shift+g).
Shift+g on its own will take you to the last line of the file.
It could be your shell and not VIM. If restarting VIM doesn't fix your problem, try opening a new shell and using VIM there. If nothing works, move your .vimrc file and any shell start ups out of the way (by renaming, not deleting, of course), open a new shell, and VIM. If that doesn't work, try a new keyboard. :-(
Closing and opening vim should reset whatever you funky mode you've discovered. If not, you've got something profoundly weird going on -- vim doesn't store settings that are turned on while in the file.
BTW, you're totally ruining my "vim doesn't break" meme.
Well, I've no idea what it was, but rebooting the computer - Macbook running leopard - seemed to work.
I'd tried new shells to no effect. I just didn't want to have to reboot.
See - macs have problems too! :(
Thanks for all the quick responses from all y'all. Hopefully I won't have to figure that one out again.