From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14557 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2012 21:33:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 30606 Received: (qmail 26666 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2012 21:32:58 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at schrab.com designates 209.177.157.228 as permitted sender) Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 17:32:56 -0400 From: Aaron Schrab To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Make vi-repeat-find more vim-like Message-ID: <20120812213256.GA11482@pug.qqx.org> Mail-Followup-To: zsh-workers@zsh.org References: <1344794407-28894-1-git-send-email-aaron@schrab.com> <1344794407-28894-2-git-send-email-aaron@schrab.com> <120812140417.ZM8252@torch.brasslantern.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <120812140417.ZM8252@torch.brasslantern.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2011-07-01) At 14:04 -0700 12 Aug 2012, Bart Schaefer wrote: >On Aug 12, 2:00pm, Aaron Schrab wrote: >} Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Make vi-repeat-find more vim-like > >In the past we've rejected this sort of patch on the grounds that zsh >is emulating vi, not emulating vim. Right, but is it worth it to be strict about that? Even if it's unlikely that the emulation will be complete in any case? Here, I think the vi behaviour is quite stupid and useless; while the vim behaviour can be really nice. Also, I want to make sure it's understood that the first patch in this series fixes a behaviour to match what would happen in both vi and vim. I just happened to notice that problem while testing out the changes for the second patch.