In all honesty the title is bad. Consider the following 5 lines:
function Example()
let ## = "-_-"
execute "normal! ]P"
call cursor(line('.'), col('.')-1)
endfunction
When this function is called, I expect to get -_- as output and the cursor should be moved to the left, meaning that it is at the third character, so if I press a key, like I for example I will get -_i-
What happens in reality is quite different (and to some degree interesting)
The output the first time this is called is - _- and after that it's _--
I assume that "cursor" shifts the position of the word under the cursor.
Basically: Why is it happening? How can I get the desired effect ?
Very important edit:
Apperantly the problem isn't in the plugins. When I go for:
call Example()
It works flawlessly. Thing is it is supposed to be triggered by a key. I have currently bound it like so:
inoremap ' <C-O>: call Example()<CR>
So now I am thinking that something in the mapping is broken...
I cannot reproduce your strange behavior. I get ----_-_-_-_- on repeated invocations, as expected. I again suspect there are plugins at work. Try with vim -N -u NONE. As this is a paste, there's little that could influence this function, though. You could try to workaround via :noautocmd call Example(), but I'd rather try to find the root cause of this disconcerting strangeness.
The "-_-" is not a full line, so the ]P (paste with adapted indent) has no effect here. You could just as well have used P.
To move the cursor one left, rather use :normal! h. The subtraction from col('.') again only works for single-byte ASCII characters.
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
In Vim, if you run
:g/some_word/d_
all lines containing "some_word" are removed and the cursor automatically jumps to the place of last deletion. I want the cursor to stay where it was before the operation. How do I accomplish this?
You can't make the cursor stay but you can make it go back to where it was:
:g/some_word/d_|norm ''
The answer by romainl is a good one, and it should do the trick without any additional fuss.
If this is a common problem, and you'd rather not add the additional norm! '' at the end (or type the key sequence when you're done), you could encapsulate it in a command:
command! -nargs=* G call s:G(<q-args>)
function! s:G(args)
let saved_position = winsaveview()
exe 'g'.a:args
call winrestview(saved_position)
endfunction
The :G command will invoke the s:G function with all of its arguments, which saves the position, runs the normal g with these exact arguments, and then restores it. So you'd do :G/some_word/d_ and it would run the command and restore the cursor in the line/column where it started.
Obviously, this only makes sense if you use it often enough and you don't often work on bare Vims (like on remote servers and such). Otherwise, it might be a better idea to try romainl's suggestion, or get used to typing in ''. Your choice.
Also, if the current position happens to be after some of these lines, the cursor might end up in an unexpected place. For example, if your cursor is on line 7 and the command deletes line 3, then you'll be back at line 7, but all the text will have shifted up one line, so you'll be in the "wrong" place. You could probably play around with this function and compensate for the change, but it'll get pretty complicated pretty fast, so I wouldn't recommend it :)
The anwolib plugin provides a handy :KeepView command; you can apply this to any Ex command, so it's even more generic than the :G command suggested by #AndrewRadev:
:KeepView g/some_word/d_
I have the following code:
function CSVTableFunc(command)
let cursor = getpos('.')
let l:winview = winsaveview()
normal(ggVG)
execute a:command
call setpos('.', cursor)
call winrestview(l:winview)
endfunction
Basically, what it does is it selects all lines from top to bottom, then executes the command that's passed in the function.
However, before the command is executed, the lines selected before hand are deselected.
What's the thing that I've missed?
Cheers!
A couple problems here.
First, you attempted to use normal(...) as if it's a function. It's not (and if it was, you used it wrong anyway, you'd be missing a call command).
What you actually told Vim was to run the following normal-mode commands:
( - back a sentence
ggVG - roughly, select all text in the buffer
) - forward a sentence
Some experimentation shows this probably actually doesn't cause any problems, but it's wrong, and it could cause problems in other circumstances.
Your bigger problem is that commands don't actually operate on a range unless you tell them to. In visual mode (i.e. when you've selected a range of lines), when you press : you automatically get '<,'> inserted on the command line. This text says "run the command on the visual selection".
Using execute does not automatically insert this range. You'd need to manually put the range at the beginning of the command, if the command supports a range. Since you did not do this, your command only runs with its default range, which is usually the current line. In your case, since you did ggVG before running your command, you probably see the command run on the last line only.
Anyway, you don't need the visual selection. Just use the special range % instead of selecting anything. % means "on every line".
The problem is, some commands may not support a range. For those commands, you will probably need to use a loop, or a :g command, to run the command on each line of interest one by one.
I have the vim EasyMotion plugin installed.
Pressing,
<Leader><Leader>f searches forward from the current line.
<Leader><Leader>F searches backward from the current line.
Is there a way to search the entire visible part of the buffer only using 'f'? I would ideally not want to use two different bindings for searching forwards and backward. One single binding to search the entire visible portion of the buffer would be most ideal.
You can try a mapping like this:
nnoremap <leader><leader>f :execute "/\\%>" . line('w0') . "1\\%<" . line('w$') . "l"<left>
That's a confusing syntax, so I'll unpack it.
line('w0') and line('w$') return the line numbers of the first and last visible lines in the buffer, respectively, so you use them to find the range for the visible part.
The / search command allows a range to be specified, but with an odd syntax. The format is /\%>Xl\%<Yl where X is the line to start from and Y is the line to end at.
It's not possible to just drop the results from line() into a normal / invocation, but we can build a string, using . to join segments together, and once the command is built, pass it in to :exec to make it happen.
Finally, there's the <left>. That's for cursor positioning. When you execute <leader><leader>f, the whole mapping fires as though you were typing it, so you end up with the full :exec command on the line, and it ends with a ", but you want to type inside those quotes. Alternatively, you could remove "<left> from the end of the mapping, but then you'll have to remember to close the quote after typing your search term.
I'm not familiar with EasyMotion, so this may not give you exactly what you were asking for (I realized this after I typed up the answer), but it will let you run a search in the currently visible part of a buffer only, and you can probably adapt it to EasyMotion's purposes without too much difficulty.
I'm writing a script in which I want to control searches programmatically, and get them highlighted. The search() function results are not highlighted (I think), so using that function is not of use to me.
What I want to do is use the 'normal /' command to search for a variable, but that doesn't seem to be straightforward. I can script the command:
execute 'normal /' . my_variable . '\<CR>'
(or other variations as suggested in the vim tip here: http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Using_normal_command_in_a_script_for_searching )
but it doesn't do anything. I can see the correct search term down in the command line after execution of the script line, but focus is in the document, the search register has not been altered, and the cursor has not done any search. (It seems as though the < CR > isn't getting entered, although no error is thrown -- and yes, I have tried using the literal ^M too.)
I can at least control the search register by doing this:
execute 'let #/ ="' . a:term .'"'
and then the obvious thing seems to be to do a:
normal n
But that 'normal n' doesn't do anything if I run it in a script. Setting the search register does work, if I manually press 'n' after the scrip terminates the search happens (and highlighting appears, since hlsearch is on). I don't even care if the cursor is positioned, I just want the register pattern to be highlighted. But various combinations of 'set hlsearch' in the script don't work either.
I know I could use 'match()', but I want to get it working with regular search highlighting, and I wonder what I'm doing wrong. It must be something simple but I'm not seeing it. Thanks for any help.
run:
let #/ = a:searchStr
from inside your function then run
normal n
from outside your function (inside it does nothing) eg.
command -nargs=* Hs call MySearch() | normal n
or you can use:
set hlsearch
instead of normal n if you don't want the cursor to move
(I cannot work out another way of doing this without having something outside the function.)
If your script is using functions, then this quote from :help function-search-undo is relevant:
The last used search pattern and the redo command "."
will not be changed by the function. This also
implies that the effect of :nohlsearch is undone
when the function returns.
Vim usually tries to reset the search pattern (and a few other things) when a function ends, often you can get around this by adding the n (next search) to the end of a mapping, or using :map <expr> and having your function return the key sequence to be executed.
On closer inspection, it seems \<CR> is not picked up inside single quotes. Try using this instead:
execute 'normal /' . my_variable . "\<CR>"