Fix double undo #100
Fix double undo #100
Conversation
When the user adds invalid arguments to the -style switch of
clang-format, the error message may yield different responses depending
on the type of failure.
Expand error message given to the user to not only be verbose on 'key'
errors.
An example:
let g:clang_format#style_options = { "Standard" : "go" }
Will result in:
Error detected while processing function clang_format#replace[6]..<SNR>77_error_message:
line 1:
clang-format has failed to format.
YAML:1:63: error: unknown enumerated scalar
{BasedOnStyle: LLVM, IndentWidth: 4, UseTab: false, Standard: 'go'}
^~~~
Error parsing -style: Invalid argument
| " When running :ClangFormat from a normal vim instance, setline() does add an entry in the undolist | ||
| " For some reason it does not do so when running in this test framework | ||
| " Also, seems like it is hard to even add another item to the change list too, always rendering: | ||
| " # number changes when saved | ||
| " # 9 1 0 seconds ago |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would be happy if someone could enlighten me regarding this comment.
Avoid add unnecessary items to the change-list if the code is already formatted according to clang-format. Add a cheerful echo to praise the user (positive nudging?). However, some users might not be pleased by that, so introduce a way to disable the joyful echo.
Kind of hard to follow the history of this, but currently (NVIM v0.5.0-427-g1f56f9a4b) it seems like this undojoin makes some unexpected behaviour for the user. Unable to tell what-else is unlocked by removing it, so let's try without it for a while.
|
What is the actual fix for the double undo here? There's several different changes mixed into this PR. |
|
I suppose the core of the PR would be c6cc7d2 (the one marked with the issue). Still, it feels more like a revert of some older fix (maybe not needed any longer, or only valid for vim?). Sneakily added the others as a bonus, although perhaps bad practice, I felt like they are separated enough in each commit. |
|
Ok thanks! I'll try applying it to my copy of this. I found this PR because I noticed that this bug as well. |
|
Oh so, this is basically just removing this one line: |
|
Yes, seems to work for me, but not sure about all consequences. |
Including fix of #98, although it is tough to follow the history of the
undojoin, it seems to be the source of the double undo, at least for neovim (v0.5.0-427-g1f56f9a4b) and vim (8.0 1-124).Tried to create a unit test for the same, however, it seems like the undo-list is behaving in a surprising way (probably me missing something).