Closes#6540
In #6221 there was a mistake in calculating which folds need to be
re-ordered. When there are no folds after those that have been adjusted,
then `move_end` remains 0. This results in reverse_fold_order()
swapping folds that have been adjusted with uninitialised folds in the
remainder of the grow array.
Add a check in foldMoveRange() to account for this case.
Hope this will make people using feed_command less likely: this hides bugs.
Already found at least two:
1. msgpackparse() will show internal error: hash_add() in case of duplicate
keys, though it will still work correctly. Currently silenced.
2. ttimeoutlen was spelled incorrectly, resulting in option not being set when
expected. Test was still functioning somehow though. Currently fixed.
When foldUpdateIEMSRecurse() re-uses an existing fold, it misses the
case where the existing fold spans from before startlnum to after
firstlnum, the new fold does not span this range, and there is no
"forced start" of a fold. We add a case for this in.
Ensure that if there was no forced break in folds, we merge folds that
now touch each other.
Include testing for a tricky foldmethod=expr case that has never been a
bug. This case works at the moment because of some effects that are not
obvious when reading the code.
A test for this could be useful to ensure a regression doesn't happen.
vim-patch:8.0.0408
In order to re-order marks according to the :move command, do_move()
uses mark_adjust() in a non-standard manner. The non-standard action is
that it moves some marks *past* other marks. This doesn't matter for
marks, but mark_adjust() calls foldMarkAdjust() which simply changes
fold starts and lengths and doesn't have enough information to know that
other folds have to be checked and reordered.
The array of folds for each window are assumed to be in order of
increasing line number, and if this gets broken some folds can get
"lost".
There has been a previous patch to avoid this problem by deleting and
recalculating all folds in the window, but this comes at the cost of
closing all folds when executing :move, and doesn't cover the case of
manual folds.
This patch adds a new function foldMoveRange() specifically for the
:move command that handles reordering folds as well as simply moving
them. Additionally, we allow calling mark_adjust_nofold() that does the
same as mark_adjust() but doesn't affect any fold array.
Calling mark_adjust_nofold() should be done in the same manner as
calling mark_adjust(), but according changes to the fold arrays must be
done seperately by the calling function.
vim-patch:8.0.0457
vim-patch:8.0.0459
vim-patch:8.0.0461
vim-patch:8.0.0465
Fix a problem when filtering manually folded lines
When foldMarkAdjustRecurse() is called to adjust folds that start inside
the range of lines that are being moved and end outside that range, it
calculates `amount_after` for its recursive call incorrectly.
The calculation assumes that folds inside the changed range are being
deleted, but this is not always the case.
This means nested folds that start after the changed range of lines are
shifted an incorrect amount.
We fix this by calculating the `amount_after` differently if the folds
inside the changed range are not being deleted.
Previously alternate branches were not accounted for properly, with this
change g- after an undo to a branch point works.
The current sequence number b_u_seq_cur is used in undo_time(), in
u_doit() this was calculated by subtracting one from the curhead
sequence number.
The curhead header entry represents the change that was just undone, so
the sequence number we want is that of the change we have moved to. This
is the sequence number of the undo head that is the uh_next element of
this curhead. That sequence number is not always one less than the
curhead sequence number -- there may have been an alternate branch at
this point.
Instead of subtracting one, we now directly find the sequence number of
curhead->uh_next.
Note some bugs were judged to have too ugly a fix to solve, tests to
demonstrate these problems, and the explanation behind not fixing them
are below.
describe('register . problems', function()
before_each(reset)
-- The difficulty here is: The basic requirement is that the text
-- inserted is treated as if it were typed in insert mode. This is why
-- the paste method is to enter insert mode and enter the ". register
-- into readbuf1.
-- We can't add a count into the readbuf here because the insert mode
-- count is implemented with readbuf2 which is checked for characters
-- after readbuf1.
-- Hence, the ".gp command (which adds extra characters into readbuf1
-- to emulate leaving the cursor after the text by moving the cursor
-- after inserting the text) would insert the motion characters into
-- the buffer instead of using them to move after the insert has been
-- done.
-- I could probably get this working properly with a special flag put
-- into start_redo_ins() and set in do_put(), but I think this adds
-- much more complexity than fixing this bug justifies.
pending('should not change the ". register with ".2p', function()
local orig_register = funcs.getreg('.')
feed('2".p')
eq(orig_register, funcs.getreg('.'))
end)
describe("cursor positioning after undo and redo with '.'", function()
before_each(reset)
local function make_cursor_test(macro_string)
return function()
feed(macro_string)
local afterpos = funcs.getcurpos()
local orig_string = curbuf_contents()
feed('u.')
eq(afterpos, funcs.getcurpos())
expect(orig_string)
end
end
-- The difficulty here is: setting the cursor after the end of the
-- pasted text is done by adding a motion command to the
-- stuffbuffer after the insert.
-- Modifying 'redobuff' is done in the code that handles inserting
-- text and moving around.
-- I could add a special case in ins_esc() that checks for a flag
-- set in do_put() to add the motion character to the redo buffer,
-- but I think that is starting to get way too convoluted for the
-- benefit.
pending('should be the same after ".gp and ".gpu.',
make_cursor_test('".gp'))
-- The difficulty here is: putting forwards is implemented by using
-- 'a' instead of 'i' to start insert.
-- Undoing with 'u' an insert that began with 'a' leaves the cursor
-- where the first character was inserted, not where the cursor was
-- when the 'a' was pressed.
-- We account for this the first time by saving the cursor position
-- in do_put(), but this isn't stored in redobuff for a second time
-- around.
-- We can't change how such a fundamental action as undo after
-- inserting with 'a' behaves, we could add in a special case
-- whereby we set a flag in do_put() and read it when entering
-- insert mode but this seems like way too much to fix such a minor
-- bug.
pending('should be the same after ".pu. and ".pu.u.',
make_cursor_test('".pu.'))
end)
end)
In Vim's main_loop function, the main loop is
while (!cmdwin
#ifdef FEAT_CMDWIN
|| cmdwin_result == 0
#endif
)
{
...
#ifdef FEAT_EVAL
/*
* May perform garbage collection when waiting for a character, but
* only at the very toplevel. Otherwise we may be using a List or
* Dict internally somewhere.
* "may_garbage_collect" is reset in vgetc() which is invoked through
* do_exmode() and normal_cmd().
*/
may_garbage_collect = (!cmdwin && !noexmode);
#endif
/*
* If we're invoked as ex, do a round of ex commands.
* Otherwise, get and execute a normal mode command.
*/
if (exmode_active)
{
if (noexmode) /* End of ":global/path/visual" commands */
return;
do_exmode(exmode_active == EXMODE_VIM);
}
else
normal_cmd(&oa, TRUE);
}
cmdwin_result is set to 0 before calling main_loop to handle the cmdwin
window and gets changed when the user causes a command to execute
(either through pressing <CR> or <C-c>). This means that when the
cmdwin isn't active OR the user is still editing their command,
main_loop runs and main_loop calls normal_cmd with toplevel true as long
as exmode isn't active.
When the normal mode state was extracted in dae006a9, the conditions for
toplevel and may_garbage_collect were combined. Since toplevel was set
to always ignore cmdwin, the v:count(1) variables were no longer being
updated when a command was prefixed with a count in the cmdwin.
Closes#5404
It is otherwise impossible to determine which test failed sanitizer/valgrind
check. test/functional/helpers.lua module return was changed so that tests which
do not provide after_each function to get new check will automatically fail.
