I've setup auto-completions for parentheses and double quotes following the directions on this page.
The auto closing for single quotes is a bit more complicated, however. When dealing with single quotes, I have to check if it is used as an apostrophe or as a quote. The criteria for an apostrophe would perhaps be when the single quote is immediately preceded by an alphabet or number.
How do I implement this setting in my vimrc?
Well, the details of that algorithm depend on the type of text (programming languages vs. prose) and individual tradeoffs. I'd recommend to study how the 6+ plugins listed on the mentioned page handle that; the different approaches are probably quite instructive.
Maybe you'll also find information how some popular IDEs implement this (at least for the open Eclipse, this information should be available).
Using this will help
ino ' ''<left>
If you dont't want completion Ctrl-v need to be typed prior to '.
Not exactly what you are looking but a way to work without complex logic at the cost of extra key stroke
Related
In vim (in Insert mode, after running exuberant ctags), I am using ctrl-x followed by ctrl-] to bring up a dropdown of various possible words/tokens. It's a great feature.
The problem is that by default, this list starts with a bunch of numeric options and automatically inserts the first numeric option, and if I backspace to get rid of the numbers and start typing a part of a word fresh -- with the idea of searching from the middle of the word -- the autocompletion behavior exits entirely.
I know I could type the first letter of the word that I want, then go from there. But that assumes that I know the first letter of the word, which is not necessarily a given.
For example, if I'm working on a pair-programming project with a friend during a long weekend, I might not remember at any given moment whether he called his method promoteRecordStatus(), updateRecordStatus() or boostRecordStatus(). In this example, I would like to type RecordStatus and get the relevant result, which does not seem to be possible at a glance with the current behavior.
So with that scenario in mind: Is there a simple, vim-native way to tell the editor to start its autocompletion without any assumptions, then search all available tokens for my typed string in all parts of each token?
I will of course consider plugin suggestions helpful, but I would prefer a short, vim-native answer that doesn't require any plugins if possible. Ideally, the configuration could be set using just a line or two.
The built-in completions all require a match at the starting position. In some cases, you could drop separator characters from the 'iskeyword' option (e.g. in Vimscript, drop # to be able to complete individual components from foo#bar#BazFunction()), but this won't work for camelCaseWords at all.
Custom :help complete-functions can implement any completion search, though. To be based on the tags database, it would have to use taglist() as a source, and filter according to the completion base entered before triggering the completion. If you do not anchor this pattern match at the beginning, you have your desired completion.
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. The Problem
My goal is something like the following:
I have a line of text like
Who left the dead mouse in the fridge?
and I want to highlight the first the in green, just this one occurrence. That is, I don't want to syn match ThisMagicWord "\<the\>" or anything that will overzealously highlight other thes.
There is one other requirement, which is that if the user edits the other text on the line, say to
Who on earth left the delicious dead mouse in the fridge?
the highlighting will track with the word the, so long as the user doesn't edit that one particular word.
ii. The Kludge
Now, I have a solution to this. In fact, I am proud of my solution, because it was tricky to think up. But it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a good solution.
It turns out that the Unicode character Combining Grapheme Joiner is effectively a no-op in Vim. It produces no glyph, and takes up no width. It is the only such character that I have discovered. So what I do is, I surreptitiously edit the line in question to be
Who left the<CGJ> dead mouse in the fridge?
and then define a rule
syn match ThisMagicWord "the<CGJ>"
I will additionally trigger on BufWritePre and BufWritePost to strip the CGJs out of the file on disk.
iii. The Questions
Is there a no-op character in Vim (or a way to produce one) other than CGJ? Ideally a non-combining character, since the<CGJ> will not match a search for /the, due to the way Vim regexes handle combining characters.
Is there a better way to get at the behavior that I want?
You're right that there's currently no good way to mark static matches and keep them up-to-date when edits are done nearby. My approach would have been worse than your kludge: Include the line / column information in the match (via the \%l and \%v special atoms), and attempting to update those with a combination of marks (works for line changes) and intra-line custom diffing.
Though your use of special Unicode characters is clever, it's (as you admit) a hack. I've asked you for uses in the comments, and am still not completely satisfied / convinced. If you can come up with good, real use cases and current pain points, please direct them to the vim_dev mailing list (best with a functional draft patch attached). The functionality to keep track of such text is basically there (in the Vim internals), it's just not yet tracked and exposed to users / Vimscript. Though Vim development has been (often frustratingly) slow, with a compelling argument on your side, new functionality can and does happen.
How about using marks?
Move the cursor to the word you want, set a lowercase letter mark (e.g. mz), then add highlighting for the word like \%'zthe
How would you use VIM to delete a word group, which includes white space characters, but is a standard grouping you would want to access when scripting? Specifically, when you have your cursor over some part of the following text, how would delete help="initialize, lines, h2, derivs, tt, history", from below. Maybe one would need to create specific mappings. But on the other hand, it seems pretty natural to want to access text like this if you are using VIM to edit scripting programs.
parser = argparse.ArgumentParser()
parser.add_argument("task", help="initialize, lines, h2, derivs, tt, history", default='yes')
Vim has a variety of text objects built-in, e.g. da" deletes quoted text (including the quotes; di" keeps the quotes). See :help text-objects for more information.
There are some plugins, e.g. textobj-user - Support for user-defined text objects and my own CountJump plugin that make it easy to define your own, "special" text objects. Also, you'll find many such text objects on vim.org. Based on your example, argtextobj.vim - Text-object like motion for arguments may be exactly what you need here.
If you are inside the " you want to delete, I would use:
di"diW
If you were above help=, I would use something like:
d/defEnter
to remove everything until you encounter default, followed by a few x, and left-wise motion, to remove the remaining characters.
I don't really think a new mapping is needed, but your experience may vary.
What makes sense from Vim's perspective and according to its design goals is to provide small and generic elements and a few rules to combine them in order to achieve higher level tasks. It does quite a good job, I'd say, with its numerous text-objects and motions but we always have to repeat domain-specific tasks and that's exactly where Vim's extensibility comes into play. It is where users and plugin authors fill the gap with custom mappings/object/functions and… plugins.
It is fairly easy, for example, to record a macro and map it for later reuse. Or create a quick and dirty custom text-object…
The following snippet should work with your sample.
xnoremap aa /\v["'][,)]/e<CR>o?\v\s+\w+\=<CR>
onoremap aa :normal vaa<CR>
With it, you can do daa, caa, yaa and vaa from anywhere within that argument.
Obviously, this solution is extremely specific and making it more generic would most certainly involve a bit more thought but there are already relatively smart solutions floating around, as in Ingo's answer.
Background: JEdit (and some other text editors as well) support a feature called Multiple simultaneous text insertion points. (at least that's what I'm calling it here).
To understand what this means, take a look at the link.
Out of all the features in use in modern text editors, initial research seems to indicate that this is one feature that both Emacs and Vim do not actually support. If correct, this would be pretty exceptional since it's quite difficult to find a text editor feature that has not made its way into at least one of these two old-school editors.
Question: Has anyone ever seen or implemented this feature in either Emacs, Vim, or both? If so, please point me to a link, script, reference or summary that explains the details.
If you know an alternate way to do the same (or similar) thing, please let me know.
The vim way to do this is the . command which repeats the last change. So, for instance, if I change a pointer to a reference and I have a bunch of
obj->func
that I want to change to
obj.func
then I search for obj->, do 2cw to change the obj-> to obj., then do n.n.n. until all the instances are changed.
Perhaps not a flexible as what you're talking about, but it works frequently and is very intuitive and fast when it does.
moccur-edit.el almost does what you want. All the locations matching the regexp are displayed, and the editing the matches makes changes in the corresponding source. However, the editing is done on a single instance of the occurrence.
I imagine it'd be straight forward to extend it to allow you to edit them all simultaneously (at least in the simple case).
There is a demo of it found here.
Turns out, the newest versions of moccur-edit don't apply changes in real-time - you must apply the changes. The changes are also now undoable (nice win).
In EMACS, you could/would do it with M-x find-grep and a macro. If you really insist that it be fully automatic, then you'd include the find-next in the macro.
But honestly, this strikes me as a sort of Microsoft-feature: yes, it adds to the feature list, but why bother? And would you remember it existed in six months, when you want to use it again?
For emacs, multiple-cursors does exactly that.
Have a look at emacsrocks episode 13, by the author of the module.
I don't think this feature has a direct analogue in either Emacs or Vim, which is not to say that everything achievable with this feature is not possible in some fashion with the two 'old-school' editors. And like most things Emacs and Vim, power-users would probably be able to achieve such a task exceedingly quickly, even if mere mortals like myself could spend five minutes figuring out the correct grep search and replace with appropriate back-references, for example.
YASnippet package for Emacs uses it. See 2:13 and 2:44 in the screencast.
Another slight similarity: In Emacs, the rectangle editing features provided by cua-selection-mode (or cua-mode) automatically gives you multiple insertion points down the left or right edge of the marked rectangle, so that you can type a common prefix or suffix to all of those lines.
e.g.:
M-x cua-selection-mode RET (enable the global minor mode, if you don't already use this or cua-mode)
C-RET down down down (marks a 1x3 character rectangle)
type prefix here
C-RET (unmark the rectangle to return to normal editing)
It should be something like this in vim:
%s/paint.\((.*),/\1.paint(/
Or something like that, I am really bad at "mock" regular expressions.
The idea is substitute the pattern:
/paint(object,/
with
/object.paint(/
So, yes, it is "supported"
It seemed simple to do a basic version of this in Emacs lisp. This is for when you just want two places to insert text in parallel:
(defun cjw-multi-insert (text)
"insert text at both point and mark"
(interactive "sText:")
(insert-before-markers text)
(save-excursion
(exchange-point-and-mark)
(insert-before-markers text)))
When you run it, it prompts for text and inserts it at both point (current position) and mark. You can set the mark with C-SPC. This could be easily extended for N different positions. A function like set-insert-point would record current position (stored as an Emacs marker) into a list and then when you run the multi-insert command, it just iterates through the list adding text at each.
I'm not sure about what would a simple way to handle a more general "multi-editing" feature.
Nope. This would be quite difficult to do with a primarily console-based UI.
That said, there is similar features in vim (and emacs, although I've not used it nearly as much) - search and replace, as people have said, and more similarly, column insert mode: http://pivotallabs.com/users/brian/blog/articles/350-column-edit-mode-in-vi