From 42a05130955829847e68c1af5add386596b697fd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jan Edmund Lazo Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 20:41:08 -0400 Subject: vim-patch:8.1.2058: function for ex command is named inconsistently Problem: Function for ex command is named inconsistently. Solution: Rename do_marks() to ex_marks(). https://github.com/vim/vim/commit/4bd782339e370bde82c2a8976df9f335cc12eba9 --- src/nvim/mark.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'src/nvim/mark.c') diff --git a/src/nvim/mark.c b/src/nvim/mark.c index e103d3cb55..e8f1651a6e 100644 --- a/src/nvim/mark.c +++ b/src/nvim/mark.c @@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ static char_u *mark_line(pos_T *mp, int lead_len) /* * print the marks */ -void do_marks(exarg_T *eap) +void ex_marks(exarg_T *eap) { char_u *arg = eap->arg; int i; -- cgit From a9065a50518ef59351f9d0d32041a991a751653f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: timeyyy Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 13:20:07 +0100 Subject: nsmarks: initial commit --- src/nvim/mark.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) (limited to 'src/nvim/mark.c') diff --git a/src/nvim/mark.c b/src/nvim/mark.c index e8f1651a6e..454e9e46f4 100644 --- a/src/nvim/mark.c +++ b/src/nvim/mark.c @@ -905,9 +905,10 @@ void mark_adjust(linenr_T line1, linenr_T line2, long amount, long amount_after, - bool end_temp) + bool end_temp, + ExtmarkOp op) { - mark_adjust_internal(line1, line2, amount, amount_after, true, end_temp); + mark_adjust_internal(line1, line2, amount, amount_after, true, end_temp, op); } // mark_adjust_nofold() does the same as mark_adjust() but without adjusting @@ -916,14 +917,16 @@ void mark_adjust(linenr_T line1, // calling foldMarkAdjust() with arguments line1, line2, amount, amount_after, // for an example of why this may be necessary, see do_move(). void mark_adjust_nofold(linenr_T line1, linenr_T line2, long amount, - long amount_after, bool end_temp) + long amount_after, bool end_temp, + ExtmarkOp op) { - mark_adjust_internal(line1, line2, amount, amount_after, false, end_temp); + mark_adjust_internal(line1, line2, amount, amount_after, false, end_temp, op); } static void mark_adjust_internal(linenr_T line1, linenr_T line2, long amount, long amount_after, - bool adjust_folds, bool end_temp) + bool adjust_folds, bool end_temp, + ExtmarkOp op) { int i; int fnum = curbuf->b_fnum; @@ -979,6 +982,9 @@ static void mark_adjust_internal(linenr_T line1, linenr_T line2, sign_mark_adjust(line1, line2, amount, amount_after); bufhl_mark_adjust(curbuf, line1, line2, amount, amount_after, end_temp); + if (op != kExtmarkNOOP) { + extmark_adjust(curbuf, line1, line2, amount, amount_after, op, end_temp); + } } /* previous context mark */ @@ -1090,7 +1096,7 @@ static void mark_adjust_internal(linenr_T line1, linenr_T line2, // cursor is inside them. void mark_col_adjust( linenr_T lnum, colnr_T mincol, long lnum_amount, long col_amount, - int spaces_removed) + int spaces_removed, ExtmarkOp op) { int i; int fnum = curbuf->b_fnum; @@ -1110,6 +1116,13 @@ void mark_col_adjust( col_adjust(&(namedfm[i].fmark.mark)); } + // Extmarks + if (op != kExtmarkNOOP) { + // TODO(timeyyy): consider spaces_removed? (behave like a delete) + extmark_col_adjust(curbuf, lnum, mincol, lnum_amount, col_amount, + kExtmarkUndo); + } + /* last Insert position */ col_adjust(&(curbuf->b_last_insert.mark)); -- cgit From c512dffb55b259d50fb91326e40a7b4da95e525b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jan Edmund Lazo Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 20:36:53 -0400 Subject: vim-patch:8.1.0266: parsing Ex address range is not a separate function Problem: Parsing Ex address range is not a separate function. Solution: Refactor do_one_cmd() to separate address parsing. https://github.com/vim/vim/commit/ee8415bc5998792fab6f4dcf289d027856e05b89 --- src/nvim/mark.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'src/nvim/mark.c') diff --git a/src/nvim/mark.c b/src/nvim/mark.c index e8f1651a6e..432639d540 100644 --- a/src/nvim/mark.c +++ b/src/nvim/mark.c @@ -296,17 +296,17 @@ pos_T *movechangelist(int count) * - NULL if there is no mark called 'c'. * - -1 if mark is in other file and jumped there (only if changefile is TRUE) */ -pos_T *getmark_buf(buf_T *buf, int c, int changefile) +pos_T *getmark_buf(buf_T *buf, int c, bool changefile) { return getmark_buf_fnum(buf, c, changefile, NULL); } -pos_T *getmark(int c, int changefile) +pos_T *getmark(int c, bool changefile) { return getmark_buf_fnum(curbuf, c, changefile, NULL); } -pos_T *getmark_buf_fnum(buf_T *buf, int c, int changefile, int *fnum) +pos_T *getmark_buf_fnum(buf_T *buf, int c, bool changefile, int *fnum) { pos_T *posp; pos_T *startp, *endp; -- cgit From 39094b3faedde9601160806901941e4808925410 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: butwerenotthereyet <58348703+butwerenotthereyet@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 00:56:56 -0800 Subject: jumplist: browser-style (or 'tagstack') navigation #11530 Traditionally, when navigating to a specific location from the middle of the jumplist results in shifting the current location to the bottom of the list and adding the new location after it. This behavior is not desireable to all users--see, for example https://vi.stackexchange.com/questions/18344/how-to-change-jumplist-behavior. Here, another jumplist behavior is introduced. When jumpoptions (a new option set added here) includes stack, the jumplist behaves like the tagstack or like history in a web browser. That is, when navigating to a location from the middle of the jumplist 2 first 1 second 0 third <-- current location 1 fourth 2 fifth to a new location the locations after the current location in the jump list are discarded 2 first 1 second 0 third <-- current location The result is that when moving forward from that location, the new location will be appended to the jumplist: 3 first 2 second 1 third 0 new If the new location is the same new == second as some previous (but not immediately prior) entry in the jumplist, 2 first 1 second 0 third <-- current location 1 fourth 2 fifth both occurrences preserved 3 first 2 second 1 third 0 second (new) when moving forward from that location. It would be desireable to go farther and, when the new location is the same as the location that is currently next in the jumplist, new == fourth make the result of navigating to the new location by jumping (e.g. 50gg) be the same as moving forward in the jumplist 2 first 1 second 0 third 1 new <-- current location 2 fifth and simply increment the jumplist index. That change is NOT part of this patch because it would require passing the new cursor location to the function (setpcmark) from all of its callees. That in turn would require those callees to know *before* calling what the new cursor location is, which do they do not currently. --- src/nvim/mark.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'src/nvim/mark.c') diff --git a/src/nvim/mark.c b/src/nvim/mark.c index e5070f23ff..93bc497cf0 100644 --- a/src/nvim/mark.c +++ b/src/nvim/mark.c @@ -178,6 +178,16 @@ void setpcmark(void) curwin->w_pcmark.lnum = 1; } + if (jop_flags & JOP_STACK) { + // If we're somewhere in the middle of the jumplist discard everything + // after the current index. + if (curwin->w_jumplistidx < curwin->w_jumplistlen - 1) { + // Discard the rest of the jumplist by cutting the length down to + // contain nothing beyond the current index. + curwin->w_jumplistlen = curwin->w_jumplistidx + 1; + } + } + /* If jumplist is full: remove oldest entry */ if (++curwin->w_jumplistlen > JUMPLISTSIZE) { curwin->w_jumplistlen = JUMPLISTSIZE; @@ -1204,7 +1214,20 @@ void cleanup_jumplist(win_T *wp, bool checktail) break; } } - if (i >= wp->w_jumplistlen) { // no duplicate + bool mustfree; + if (i >= wp->w_jumplistlen) { // not duplicate + mustfree = false; + } else if (i > from + 1) { // non-adjacent duplicate + // When the jump options include "stack", duplicates are only removed from + // the jumplist when they are adjacent. + mustfree = !(jop_flags & JOP_STACK); + } else { // adjacent duplicate + mustfree = true; + } + + if (mustfree) { + xfree(wp->w_jumplist[from].fname); + } else { if (to != from) { // Not using wp->w_jumplist[to++] = wp->w_jumplist[from] because // this way valgrind complains about overlapping source and destination @@ -1212,8 +1235,6 @@ void cleanup_jumplist(win_T *wp, bool checktail) wp->w_jumplist[to] = wp->w_jumplist[from]; } to++; - } else { - xfree(wp->w_jumplist[from].fname); } } if (wp->w_jumplistidx == wp->w_jumplistlen) { -- cgit