Re: EDT and SET WORD [NO]DELIMITER
- From: "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 15:06:56 -0500
On 11/20/2011 11:29 AM, Jojimbo wrote:
On Nov 19, 12:26 pm, hel...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Phillip Helbig---
undress to reply) wrote:
A while back I expressed the desire to have my word delimiters normally
not be words in themselves so that when the first character after the
full line length (defined via SET WRAP) is reached is a delimiter it
will wrap to the next line together with what is in the word immediately
before it while at the same time have the opposite behaviour when moving
with KP1 and KP and deleting with KP-. After some suggestions here, I
put SET WORD NODELIMITER in EDTINI.EDT to make it the default. I
defined CON N and CON D (surprisingly they weren't yet defined) to
switch to the other behaviour when needed (i.e. CON D before I start
using KP1 or KP- and CON N to return to the default behaviour when I am
done).
So far, so good.
What I would now like to have is the NODELIMITER behaviour also when a
delimiter is the beginning character of a new word which then wraps to
the next line. Whether I have NODELIMITER or DELIMITER doesn't matter
in this case.
Is there any way to achieve this?
Also, since "'" is used to delimit the string, is there any way to get
"'" itself to be a delimiter?
Dear Phillip,
EDT was EOL so many years ago. Don't you think it would be an
interesting challenge to accomplish what you want in EVE by writing
some TPU code? All the source is there in sys$examples and TPU really
is a fascinating language. Consider having native datatypes for
patterns and buffers. I suggest giving it a try rather than beating
the EDT dead horse.
Regards, Jim
If EDT is the editor your fingers know. . . .
I've used a couple of the others, TECO and TPU "open book".
I used TECO a couple of times to do something it could handle
easily and EDT could not. The same for TPU. Both seemed clumsy and
awkward. Regular users of either TECO or TPU would probably feel the same about EDT.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: EDT and SET WORD [NO]DELIMITER
- From: Simon Clubley
- Re: EDT and SET WORD [NO]DELIMITER
- References:
- EDT and SET WORD [NO]DELIMITER
- From: Phillip Helbig---undress to reply
- Re: EDT and SET WORD [NO]DELIMITER
- From: Jojimbo
- EDT and SET WORD [NO]DELIMITER
- Prev by Date: Re: EDT and SET WORD [NO]DELIMITER
- Next by Date: Re: OT: About Digital and divisions
- Previous by thread: Re: EDT and SET WORD [NO]DELIMITER
- Next by thread: Re: EDT and SET WORD [NO]DELIMITER
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|