change inside

change inside

[shawn wilson]

i use vim bindkeys and am quite happy with it. however one feature
that i use a lot in vim is the 'inside' feature - di, ci, yi, etc. and
i don't seem to have this on the shell. what's the best way to make
something like this work and/or could this be implemented to make this
more like native vim?

Re: change inside

[Bart Schaefer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1107 bytes --]

On Friday, October 26, 2012, shawn wilson wrote:

> i use vim bindkeys and am quite happy with it. however one feature
> that i use a lot in vim is the 'inside' feature - di, ci, yi, etc. and
> i don't seem to have this on the shell. what's the best way to make
> something like this work and/or could this be implemented to make this
> more like native vim?
>

You will need to create a custom zle widget, or rather, a set of them.  The
basics of finding the "inside" or "around" are the same for all of them, so
you can probably get by with one function that is attached to several
widget names and decides what to do based on the value of $WIDGET.

The first thing the function should do is invoke "zle vi-find-next-char",
this should take care  of reading the target character for the
inside/around boundary.  Then $BUFFER[CURSOR] is that character, so you can
use it to find the previous occurrence of the same.  Then you can set
$MARK, move the cursor to that previous occurence, and call something such
as the kill-region builtin or the narrow-to-region function to implement
the action for $WIDGET.

Re: change inside

[shawn wilson]

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 6:38 AM, Bart Schaefer
<schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
> On Friday, October 26, 2012, shawn wilson wrote:
>
>> i use vim bindkeys and am quite happy with it. however one feature
>> that i use a lot in vim is the 'inside' feature - di, ci, yi, etc. and
>> i don't seem to have this on the shell. what's the best way to make
>> something like this work and/or could this be implemented to make this
>> more like native vim?
>>
>
> You will need to create a custom zle widget, or rather, a set of them.

thanks for the pointers. i'll look at what it'll take to script this
out. however, (and i didn't ask this directly because i was unsure if
there was just a feature i had missed) what is the general idea behind
the vi mode in zsh? is this a feature that is meant to stay compatible
with bash/tcsh/etc? or is this meant to bring as much of the vim
command set as possible, but without being cumbersome into zsh?

if the philosophy is the former, than maybe a pull request to
oh-my-zsh is the way to go (who is ~10 months behind on merges).
however, if it is the later, than this should really be a feature
request.

Re: change inside

[Bart Schaefer]

On Oct 27,  9:16am, shawn wilson wrote:
}
} thanks for the pointers. i'll look at what it'll take to script this
} out. however, (and i didn't ask this directly because i was unsure if
} there was just a feature i had missed) what is the general idea behind
} the vi mode in zsh? is this a feature that is meant to stay compatible
} with bash/tcsh/etc? or is this meant to bring as much of the vim
} command set as possible, but without being cumbersome into zsh?

The philosophy *was* to remain as close as possible to the ORIGINAL "vi"
and *avoid* any of the new features introduced by the slew of replacement
vi-like editors, only one of which at the time was vim.

Of course "new features" now means "features less than 20 years old" ...

I won't attempt to assert that this still *is* the philosophy, because
ever since zsh stopped being interesting as a project for university
computer science students to hack on, we've had a hard time finding
enough volunteer programmers to change much of anything, and vi mode in
the line editor is not something users have been clamoring about.  So
to that extent there's not much philosophy other than the overarching
zsh concept of "don't break anything that's been working for years."

I will say that vim is one of the reasons I became an emacs user.  The
whole point of vi, for me, was to create my own custom macros and attach
them to unused keystrokes; if my custom macros aren't loaded, I expect
those keystrokes to beep at me, not go off doing some new thing I have
no idea how to unwind because the undo action has been "improved".  I
don't think there's any such thing as an "unused keystroke" in vim, now.
Sigh, pardon the curmudgeonly rant, but "don't break anything ..."

Re: change inside

[Ray Andrews]

On 27/10/12 10:42 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> I won't attempt to assert that this still *is* the philosophy, because
> ever since zsh stopped being interesting as a project for university
> computer science students to hack on, we've had a hard time finding
> enough volunteer programmers to change much of anything,
How sad, and how difficult to understand.  I'm still only using zsh in 
the most superficial way, and my opinion of it vs. bash isn't worth very 
much, but for whatever it is worth, I find the bash shell, as it comes 
ROOTB to be so crippled and horrible and useless as to be almost 
sadistic. So awful as to drive me right back to DOS, where I had the 
sublime elegance of 4DOS to work with. I turned to zsh in sheer 
desperation. It too is rather crippled ROOTB, but it seemed much easier 
to get to the point where it is a pleasure to use, and now I can't 
imagine going back to bash.  This being so, I don't understand how it 
might be that keeping zsh brightly polished would *not* be seen as one 
of the most important tasks in the 'nix world and I would have guessed 
that there would be hundreds of guys working on it.

Re: change inside

[shawn wilson]

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Ray Andrews <rayandrews@eastlink.ca> wrote:
> On 27/10/12 10:42 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
>>
>> I won't attempt to assert that this still *is* the philosophy, because
>> ever since zsh stopped being interesting as a project for university
>> computer science students to hack on, we've had a hard time finding
>> enough volunteer programmers to change much of anything,
>
> How sad, and how difficult to understand.  I'm still only using zsh in the
> most superficial way, and my opinion of it vs. bash isn't worth very much,
> but for whatever it is worth, I find the bash shell, as it comes ROOTB to be
> so crippled and horrible and useless as to be almost sadistic. So awful as
> to drive me right back to DOS, where I had the sublime elegance of 4DOS to
> work with. I turned to zsh in sheer desperation. It too is rather crippled
> ROOTB, but it seemed much easier to get to the point where it is a pleasure
> to use, and now I can't imagine going back to bash.  This being so, I don't
> understand how it might be that keeping zsh brightly polished would *not* be
> seen as one of the most important tasks in the 'nix world and I would have
> guessed that there would be hundreds of guys working on it.

yeah, i had no idea that y'all were in such a need for developers. i
mean, that's really interesting since pretty much everyone i know who
knows what a shell is uses zsh and most have used it for years. i've
only recently gotten past the superficial level but always loved the
autocomplete over bash. i mean, i noticed the other day that debian
even has a /etc/bash-completion.d/ directory with tons of little
scripts for programs. to me that's just kludgy.

i sorta like what bart said about vi. maybe i'll get board one day,
compile exvi and start scripting out all the features i like with it.
:) i do like some things to be loosely built in though - like the
module system, but maybe an option to the module to say, give me
extended features (like the modes in the vipr emacs module).

idk how much i'd be able to help, but i cloned the git (because i
wanted a newer shell on debian stable) so maybe i'll look through the
code and see if there's any help i can provide.

Re: change inside

[Takeshi Banse]

Hi,

* shawn wilson <ag4ve.us@gmail.com> [2012-10-27 03:06]:
> i use vim bindkeys and am quite happy with it. however one feature
> that i use a lot in vim is the 'inside' feature - di, ci, yi, etc. and

I did it for my own, but it is imperfect though.

https://github.com/hchbaw/opp.zsh

Thanks.

Re: change inside

[zzapper]

shawn wilson wrote in news:CAH_OBicRQa-a9Mv_sr6emgObHD11CjF3hxF3M=
3LdfTxib8YpA@mail.gmail.com:

> i use vim bindkeys and am quite happy with it. however one feature
> that i use a lot in vim is the 'inside' feature - di, ci, yi, etc. and
> i don't seem to have this on the shell. what's the best way to make
> something like this work and/or could this be implemented to make this
> more like native vim?
> 

the inside/outside operators are relatively new to vim of course.
They would be particularly useful when editting commands of course because 
they often contain a mess of quotes.

especially ci' and ca'

-- 
zzapper
http://zzapper.co.uk/ Technical Tips