[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: edit.m and EDITOR
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: edit.m and EDITOR |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Apr 2012 08:31:14 -0400 |
On 11-Apr-2012, Mike Miller wrote:
| Maybe I'm way off here, but I'll throw in anyway. I do see a difference
| between EDITOR and edit's FUNCTION.EDITOR. In the context of the edit
| command, people seem to want to fork an editor in the background, edit
| code while you still have access to the Octave shell. Indeed, as I
| recently learned, the default edit "mode" is now "async".
|
| For edit_history, the EDITOR is called synchronously a la Unix "fc". It
| must be that way for the results to be useful. For me, that means I
| want it to happen in the same terminal.
|
| Maybe these are still the same for most people, but for me:
|
| octave:1> getenv("EDITOR"), EDITOR, edit get EDITOR
| ans = vim
| ans = vim
| ans = gvim %s
|
| If these do collapse to one setting, I'm sure I'll be ok :)
OK, I didn't realize that the value of EDITOR in the edit function was
not just the name of the editor program, but also could contain some
format specification. Ugh. I don't see a good solution that won't
break backward compatibility in some way.
jwe
- edit.m and EDITOR, Jordi GutiƩrrez Hermoso, 2012/04/10
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR, Ben Abbott, 2012/04/10
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR, Jordi GutiƩrrez Hermoso, 2012/04/10
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR, Michael Goffioul, 2012/04/10
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR, John W. Eaton, 2012/04/10
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR, Mike Miller, 2012/04/11
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR,
John W. Eaton <=
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR, Michael Goffioul, 2012/04/11
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR, John W. Eaton, 2012/04/11
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR, Michael Goffioul, 2012/04/11
- Re: edit.m and EDITOR, Ben Abbott, 2012/04/10