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
}
}
}