Replies: 1 comment 3 replies
-
|
For surround, it would be great to keep the pattern used with native operators, that is, The problem is, 100% consistency is only possible if we don't use After taking many factors into consideration, it seems we are left with two choices: No1 Cons:
Note: No2 Cons:
In the end, both are okay-ish. The choice is:
My main concern is the surround mnemonic. If only we could find an alternative one, like "embrace" ["b"], "box" ["x"], "wrap" ["w"]... but there's nothing for "z". |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Here's what I am using for nvim-surrround: require('nvim-surround').setup({
keymaps = {
insert = '<C-g>z',
insert_line = 'gC-ggZ',
normal = 'gz',
normal_cur = 'gZ',
normal_line = 'gzgz',
normal_cur_line = 'gZgZ',
visual = 'gz',
visual_line = 'gZ',
delete = 'gzd',
change = 'gzc',
}
})I think we should find a solution where |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yeah, this is what I - in my personal config - have settled on too, except |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks for your ideas! I came up with this option: require("nvim-surround").setup({
keymaps = {
insert = "<c-g>x",
insert_line = "<c-g>X",
normal = "yx",
normal_cur = "yxx",
normal_line = "yX",
normal_cur_line = "yXX",
visual = "x",
visual_line = "X",
delete = "dx",
change = "cx",
change_line = "cX",
},
})
vim.keymap.set({ "n", "x", "o" }, "s", "<plug>(leap-forward)")
vim.keymap.set({ "n", "x", "o" }, "S", "<plug>(leap-backward)")
vim.keymap.set({ "n", "x", "o" }, "gs", "<plug>(leap-from-window)")
vim.keymap.set({ "n", "x", "o" }, "gS", "<plug>(leap)")(Essentially just replaced all the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Follow-up to the half-baked ideas in #41. I'm just dumping this here, trying to perform inception, so to say.
Q: "Why the fuss at all? Vim is about DIY, everyone can remap everything."
A: Having canonical mappings doesn't mean that everyone should use them. Still, good defaults are very important, especially for plugins like leap or vim-surround, that are kinda special: it's not just specific functionality they provide, for e.g. git stuff or code formatting. They aim to integrate into the very core of Vim as a text editor. Having conventions people - including other plugin authors - can rely on can be a feature too.
And, to be totally honest, because I think I echo many people's sentiments when I say that both should be included in the core eventually, even if that means years from now, even if the "motion" part just means the most bare-bones vanilla 2-char sneaking.
Personally I'd love to be able to break down the status quo with Leap, that is, handle the complete mess that resulted from:
s->S,S->gStransformation when switching from Normal to Visual?ysas the "basic" trigger?).s/S/v_s). Thus making 1. irrelevant, and - ironically - 2. itself pointless.With this out of the way:
Premises:
s/Sare rather useless shortcuts forclandccgsis needed by no one, there is even a discussion about removing it. IMO, it would make a lot of sense to establish it as a semi-official surround prefix, instead of repurposing it for something else.s/S, sorry.So here are finalists among the arrangements I came up with:
surround mappings in detail:
Alternatives for native keybindings that have been taken over:
s=clS=ccv_s=v_cv_S=Vcif not already in linewise mode (else =v_c)v_x=v_dv_X->vnoremap D X, and use$Dfor vanillav_b_Dbehav.gs-> not neededObservations:
gsrandgsdare in fact effortless to type;gsiwfeels even better thanysiw(y-iis a pretty uncomfortable stretch for the 1st and 2nd finger)! These are actually good sequences.Musings:
zSto something arbitrary but more comfortable anyway, or is it tolerable enough as a default?Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions