I think I've found a typo in the documentation for motions F and T. It
states they are charwise-inclusive, but it seems to me they behave as
exclusive. Given that they are backwards, that the inclusive/exclusive
distinction is only apparent when acting over a range, and that not many
people delete/yank/etc backwards ranges, I guess it just went through
This is vim 6.3 on Windows.
Please let me know if I should report this somewhere, given I've seen Bram
take note of bugs reported here I thought it'd be a good idea to write
here. Or maybe I'm just wrong in my deduction.
I just stumbled on it as I maintain a vi/vim emulator myself, I had some
weird behavior reports on mine, and went to check vim's operation &
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, [hidden email] wrote:
> > I think I've found a typo in the documentation for motions F and T. It
> While we're on the topic of typos ;) I noticed one in ":help offset" for
> Vim 7. "search" was spelled as "searcn". I'm not sure if it's fixed
It was still there. The top of the h fell off, so it turned into an n,
because my video card was partly broken. Some pixels went missing.
That video card is completely broken now, I had to replace it, so the
problem is gone. Seriously! Well, the part of the video card being
broken, not that missing pixels cause an h to turn into an n in the help
BLACK KNIGHT: I move for no man.
ARTHUR: So be it!
[hah] [parry thrust]
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's left arm off]
ARTHUR: Now stand aside, worthy adversary.
BLACK KNIGHT: 'Tis but a scratch.
The Quest for the Holy Grail (Monty Python)