Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Better dot command to enhance the behavior and fix some issues related to it #77

Closed
jeffreytse opened this issue Mar 31, 2021 · 0 comments
Closed

Better dot command to enhance the behavior and fix some issues related to it #77

jeffreytse opened this issue Mar 31, 2021 · 0 comments
Assignees
@jeffreytse
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@jeffreytse
Copy link
Owner

As we known, the default dot command's behavior is not good and it has some issues with this plugin.

For example:

  • Using R command from normal mode to replace characters that we can not input a newline character.
  • Using R command from visual mode doesn't remove lines of selection.
  • Using r command from visual mode to replace multi-lines selection will join lines.
  • ...

Above example also impacts the dot command, and we will get unexpected behaviors. So it is urgent to do some stuff to enhance this dot command and make it perfect.
@jeffreytse jeffreytse added the enhancement New feature or request label Mar 31, 2021
@jeffreytse jeffreytse self-assigned this Mar 31, 2021
jeffreytse added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 31, 2021
@jeffreytse
feat: better dot command for repeating change (#77)
c141874 
This commit has a significant update about dot command, it gives
you a better experience of near-native vim mode and fixed some bugs
on dot command.
@jeffreytse jeffreytse mentioned this issue Apr 1, 2021
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@jeffreytse jeffreytse

Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@jeffreytse