Few remaining ,, commands

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Few remaining ,, commands

Steve Litt
Hi all,

Most of the possible ,, commands are used up, and we really should leave a
couple for users' personal use.

I'd suggest we look very long and hard at assigning future ,, commands, and
assign them only to things that are done VERY often and things that are VERY
hard to do without them. The only purpose of ,, commands is speed, so if it's
a (relatively) rarely done operation, it's a waste of a ,, command.

Tempting as it would be to re-harvest already assigned but seldom used ,,
commands and use them for more frequent operations, I think it's a bad idea to
yank users' pet keystrokes out from under them unless really nobody's using
them. Instead, we should jealously guard any future ,, assignments. Perhaps
future operations not done often should be ,. commands. That's a much tougher
keystroke hit, but if you only do it once every 15 minutes, so what? Maybe we
could even have ,. commands have a third keystroke before the command
identifier, maybe ,.. or ,., or whatever, so we have enough slow commands for
the foreseeable future.

SteveT

Steve Litt
Recession Relief Package
http://www.recession-relief.US
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/stevelitt


_______________________________________________
VimOutliner mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.lists.vimoutliner.org/mailman/listinfo
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Few remaining ,, commands

Noel Henson
On Sunday 06 September 2009, Steve Litt wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Most of the possible ,, commands are used up, and we really should leave
> a couple for users' personal use.
>
> I'd suggest we look very long and hard at assigning future ,, commands,
> and assign them only to things that are done VERY often and things that
> are VERY hard to do without them. The only purpose of ,, commands is
> speed, so if it's a (relatively) rarely done operation, it's a waste of
> a ,, command.
>
> Tempting as it would be to re-harvest already assigned but seldom used
> ,, commands and use them for more frequent operations, I think it's a
> bad idea to yank users' pet keystrokes out from under them unless really
> nobody's using them. Instead, we should jealously guard any future ,,
> assignments. Perhaps future operations not done often should be ,.
> commands. That's a much tougher keystroke hit, but if you only do it
> once every 15 minutes, so what? Maybe we could even have ,. commands
> have a third keystroke before the command identifier, maybe ,.. or ,.,
> or whatever, so we have enough slow commands for the foreseeable future.
>
> SteveT
>

Steve,

You bring up a good issue. I, myself, have been having some issues with the
number of commands. We can, in some cases, redefine existing keystrokes,
just for outlining, like 'p' and 'P'. We can also use other quick
keystrokes when necessary or for personal use. I have a couple of '..'
commands.

We should guard the remaining ,, commands carefully but I think we should
also publish the public functions so people can add their own.

I was also thinking of creating a vooptions variable similar to vim's
formatoptions, that users could set to control things like paste behaviors.

Noel

--

------------------------------------------------------------------
  Noel Henson
  www.noels-lab.com Chips, firmware and embedded systems
  www.vimoutliner.org Work fast. Think well.

_______________________________________________
VimOutliner mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.lists.vimoutliner.org/mailman/listinfo