How to "filter" a plaintext pattern in a separate fullpage buffer to work on it separately ?

[tjg]

Let us say I have this plaintext file (no code) :

~ Robert is tall
~ Linda is a brunette
~ Dieter who lives in Berlin speaks English fluently
~ Robert is smaller than Linda
~ Dieter said : Speak you Deutsch ?
~ Linda is as blonde as Robert is dark, and, at 5ft 6, much taller than him
etc…

NB : each line is tagged, thanks to a Dictionary (for example : Robert is tall @RN &Washington), and those tags are highlighted.

In order to verify that there are no errors/contradictions in my text, what I wish is :
1) to "filter" patterns (e.g. Robert)
2) into a different full-page buffer (not in a window at the bottom of the screen),
3) where I can suppress the errors/contradictions
4) while keeping the highlightings

The possibilities seem (for a learner) to be :

a) * on the word Robert : satisfies partly 1), 3) and 4) but is not efficient with a long file
b) :g/Robert/p : satisfies 1) but not 2) (window at the bottom) nor 4) ; as for 3), I do not know
c) [I : same results as with :g/Robert/p
d) :vimgrep /Robert/ %, then :copen : same results as with :g/Robert/p, with a new inconvenience : each line is populated with its own path (which is of course necessary when quickfixing multiple files)

Is there a way to achieve what I wish ?

[Ben Fritz]

On Thursday, November 1, 2012 10:13:20 AM UTC-5, tjg wrote:

> what I wish is :
>
> 1) to "filter" patterns (e.g. Robert)
> 2) into a different full-page buffer (not in a window at the bottom of the
> screen),
> 3) where I can suppress the errors/contradictions
> 4) while keeping the highlightings
>
> The possibilities seem (for a learner) to be :
>
> a) * on the word Robert : satisfies partly 1), 3) and 4) but is not
> efficient with a long file
> b) :g/Robert/p : satisfies 1) but not 2) (window at the bottom) nor 4) ; as
> for 3), I do not know
> c) [I : same results as with :g/Robert/p
> d) :vimgrep /Robert/ %, then :copen : same results as with :g/Robert/p, with
> a new inconvenience : each line is populated with its own path (which is of
> course necessary when quickfixing multiple files)
>

How about:

1. :%y to copy (yank) all text in the buffer
2. :tabnew to open a new, empty "full-page buffer"
3. p to paste (put) the copied text
4. do whatever you do to re-apply highlight
5. :v/Robert/d to remove all lines where "Robert" is not present

I have no idea whether you can "suppress the errors/contradictions" in an
automated fashion. If you can find an algorithm to do that in general, certainly
it can be done in Vimscript (or Perl, python, Lua, etc.), even if it takes some
heavy-duty scripting.

--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

[tjg]

Thanks for your answer.

In fact I simply want to suppress errors manually, so, no need for automation, nor AI.
All I wish is to have the possibility :
- to "filter" the relevant lines into a full-page buffer (and not a window at the bottom of the screen)
- ... as if all the other lines had disappeared
- where I can see them with their highlighting preserved
- where I can modify them efficiently by concentrating on one pattern at a time
- and then go back to the file and find the lines as modified by me in the "filtering buffer".

Thanks again

[Ben Fritz]

On Thursday, November 1, 2012 12:02:18 PM UTC-5, tjg wrote:

> Thanks for your answer.
>
>
>
> In fact I simply want to suppress errors manually, so, no need for
>
> automation, nor AI.
>
> All I wish is to have the possibility :
>
> - to "filter" the relevant lines into a full-page buffer (and not a window
>
> at the bottom of the screen)
>
> - ... as if all the other lines had disappeared
>
> - where I can see them with their highlighting preserved
>
> - where I can modify them efficiently by concentrating on one pattern at a
>
> time
>
> - and then go back to the file and find the lines as modified by me in the
>
> "filtering buffer".
>
>

OK, so you don't want to actually get a new scratch buffer.

Try :tab split followed by this:

http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Folding_with_Regular_Expression

--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

[tjg]

Thank you very much for your answer.

One question, nevertheless : I have already set my fold method to an expression found in the Vim documentation :

This will make a fold out of paragraphs separated by blank lines:
:set foldexpr=getline(v:lnum)=~'^\\s*$'&&getline(v:lnum+1)=~'\\S'?'<1':1

Is it possible to have 1 fold method (expression) and 2 expressions for 2 different situations, and in that case, a usual expression (folding on paragraphs) plus an expression specific to a tab split ?

Thanks again

[scott-268]

On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 10:01:43AM -0700, tjg wrote:
> Thanks for your answer.

> In fact I simply want to suppress errors manually, so, no need for
> automation, nor AI.
> All I wish is to have the possibility :
> - to "filter" the relevant lines into a full-page buffer (and not a window
> at the bottom of the screen)
> - ... as if all the other lines had disappeared
> - where I can see them with their highlighting preserved
> - where I can modify them efficiently by concentrating on one pattern at a
> time
> - and then go back to the file and find the lines as modified by me in the
> "filtering buffer".

this isn't exactly what you are asking for, but it's close, and I feel
may be of use to some, possibly yourself.  I've had fun with a folding
tool:

nnoremap <silent> <Leader>o :setlocal foldexpr=(getline(v:lnum)=~@/)?0:(getline(v:lnum-1)=~@/)\\|\\|(getline(v:lnum+1)=~@/)?1:2 foldmethod=expr foldlevel=0 foldcolumn=2<CR>
nnoremap <silent> <Leader>oo :call UnsetFolds()<CR>

the first mapping of <Leader>o is supposed to be all one line

UnsetFolds is defined as

function! UnsetFolds()
    setlocal foldexpr=0
    setlocal foldcolumn=0
endfunction

with these mappings, after any search if I hit <Leader>o I get every
line that doesn't have my search pattern folded away into oblivion and
only lines with my search pattern are visible (and easy to work with).
My mnemonic when working with these mappings is to think "only."

<Leader>oo then unfolds all

hth,

sc

--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

[Ben Fritz]

On Thursday, November 1, 2012 1:54:56 PM UTC-5, tjg wrote:

> Thank you very much for your answer.
>
>
>
> One question, nevertheless : I have already set my fold method to an
>
> expression found in the Vim documentation :
>
>
>
> /This will make a fold out of paragraphs separated by blank lines:
>
> :set foldexpr=getline(v:lnum)=~'^\\s*$'&&getline(v:lnum+1)=~'\\S'?'<1':1/
>
>
>
> Is it possible to have 1 fold method (expression) and 2 expressions for 2
>
> different situations, and in that case, a usual expression (folding on
>
> paragraphs) plus an expression specific to a tab split ?
>

Yes. The 'foldexpr' option is local to the Window. So you can do whatever you want in a split window/tab without affecting the first window/tab. Just be sure to use :setlocal and not :set.

--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

[tjg]

Thank you for your answer.

If I understand well, I must

- first search a pattern, e.g. /Robert
- then apply your local expression fold method, here <leader>o

Am I right ?

Thanks again

[tjg]

@Ben Fritz

This is very clear
Thank you

[scott-268]

On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 01:53:47PM -0700, tjg wrote:
> Thank you for your answer.

> If I understand well, I must

> - first search a pattern, e.g. /Robert
> - then apply your local expression fold method, here <leader>o

> Am I right ?

yes, that's it exactly -- it's very useful

when done you can restore normality via <Leader>oo

--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

[stosss]

On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 6:20 PM, sc <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 01:53:47PM -0700, tjg wrote:
>> Thank you for your answer.
>
>> If I understand well, I must
>
>> - first search a pattern, e.g. /Robert
>> - then apply your local expression fold method, here <leader>o
>
>> Am I right ?
>
> yes, that's it exactly -- it's very useful
>
> when done you can restore normality via <Leader>oo

Trying to learn.

Okay what is <Leader> or <leader>

All I found when I ran :h leader

was these

*g:html_map_leader
*g:html_map_entity_leader

Thanks

--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

[stosss]

>
> Trying to learn.
>
> Okay what is <Leader> or <leader>
>
> All I found when I ran :h leader
>
> was these
>
> *g:html_map_leader
> *g:html_map_entity_leader
>

sorry found <Leader> when I used :h <Leader>

--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php