patch 9.0.0861: solution for "!!sort" in closed fold is not optimal
Problem: Solution for "!!sort" in closed fold is not optimal.
Solution: Use a different range instead of the subtle difference in handling
a range with an offset. (issue #11487)
diff --git a/src/ex_docmd.c b/src/ex_docmd.c
index 02bca38..d5037a4 100644
--- a/src/ex_docmd.c
+++ b/src/ex_docmd.c
@@ -4308,9 +4308,6 @@
lnum = MAXLNUM;
do
{
-#ifdef FEAT_FOLDING
- int base_char = *cmd;
-#endif
switch (*cmd)
{
case '.': // '.' - Cursor position
@@ -4631,16 +4628,10 @@
else
{
#ifdef FEAT_FOLDING
- // Relative line addressing: need to adjust for closed folds
- // after the first address.
- // Subtle difference: "number,+number" and "number,-number"
- // adjusts to end of closed fold before adding/subtracting,
- // while "number,.+number" adjusts to end of closed fold after
- // adding to make "!!" expanded into ".,.+N" work correctly.
- int adjust_for_folding = addr_type == ADDR_LINES
- && (i == '-' || i == '+')
- && address_count >= 2;
- if (adjust_for_folding && (i == '-' || base_char != '.'))
+ // Relative line addressing: need to adjust for lines in a
+ // closed fold after the first address.
+ if (addr_type == ADDR_LINES && (i == '-' || i == '+')
+ && address_count >= 2)
(void)hasFolding(lnum, NULL, &lnum);
#endif
if (i == '-')
@@ -4653,12 +4644,6 @@
goto error;
}
lnum += n;
-#ifdef FEAT_FOLDING
- // ".+number" rounds up to the end of a closed fold after
- // adding, so that ":!!sort" sorts one closed fold.
- if (adjust_for_folding && base_char == '.')
- (void)hasFolding(lnum, NULL, &lnum);
-#endif
}
}
}
diff --git a/src/ops.c b/src/ops.c
index 4515453..ed8a5d8 100644
--- a/src/ops.c
+++ b/src/ops.c
@@ -3333,14 +3333,32 @@
stuffcharReadbuff('.');
else
stuffnumReadbuff((long)oap->start.lnum);
- if (oap->end.lnum != oap->start.lnum)
+
+#ifdef FEAT_FOLDING
+ // When using !! on a closed fold the range ".!" works best to operate
+ // on, it will be made the whole closed fold later.
+ linenr_T endOfStartFold = oap->start.lnum;
+ (void)hasFolding(oap->start.lnum, NULL, &endOfStartFold);
+#endif
+ if (oap->end.lnum != oap->start.lnum
+#ifdef FEAT_FOLDING
+ && oap->end.lnum != endOfStartFold
+#endif
+ )
{
+ // Make it a range with the end line.
stuffcharReadbuff(',');
if (oap->end.lnum == curwin->w_cursor.lnum)
stuffcharReadbuff('.');
else if (oap->end.lnum == curbuf->b_ml.ml_line_count)
stuffcharReadbuff('$');
- else if (oap->start.lnum == curwin->w_cursor.lnum)
+ else if (oap->start.lnum == curwin->w_cursor.lnum
+#ifdef FEAT_FOLDING
+ // do not use ".+number" for a closed fold, it would count
+ // folded lines twice
+ && !hasFolding(oap->end.lnum, NULL, NULL)
+#endif
+ )
{
stuffReadbuff((char_u *)".+");
stuffnumReadbuff((long)oap->line_count - 1);
diff --git a/src/testdir/test_fold.vim b/src/testdir/test_fold.vim
index a147721..2f4aade 100644
--- a/src/testdir/test_fold.vim
+++ b/src/testdir/test_fold.vim
@@ -72,6 +72,54 @@
quit!
endfunc
+func Test_address_offsets()
+ " check the help for :range-closed-fold
+ enew
+ call setline(1, [
+ \ '1 one',
+ \ '2 two',
+ \ '3 three',
+ \ '4 four FOLDED',
+ \ '5 five FOLDED',
+ \ '6 six',
+ \ '7 seven',
+ \ '8 eight',
+ \])
+ set foldmethod=manual
+ normal 4Gvjzf
+ 3,4+2yank
+ call assert_equal([
+ \ '3 three',
+ \ '4 four FOLDED',
+ \ '5 five FOLDED',
+ \ '6 six',
+ \ '7 seven',
+ \ ], getreg(0,1,1))
+
+ enew!
+ call setline(1, [
+ \ '1 one',
+ \ '2 two',
+ \ '3 three FOLDED',
+ \ '4 four FOLDED',
+ \ '5 five FOLDED',
+ \ '6 six FOLDED',
+ \ '7 seven',
+ \ '8 eight',
+ \])
+ normal 3Gv3jzf
+ 2,4-1yank
+ call assert_equal([
+ \ '2 two',
+ \ '3 three FOLDED',
+ \ '4 four FOLDED',
+ \ '5 five FOLDED',
+ \ '6 six FOLDED',
+ \ ], getreg(0,1,1))
+
+ bwipe!
+endfunc
+
func Test_indent_fold()
new
call setline(1, ['', 'a', ' b', ' c'])
diff --git a/src/version.c b/src/version.c
index 0e991a3..dd69273 100644
--- a/src/version.c
+++ b/src/version.c
@@ -696,6 +696,8 @@
static int included_patches[] =
{ /* Add new patch number below this line */
/**/
+ 861,
+/**/
860,
/**/
859,