You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
With the current implementation, when you press <n>., the last insert is repeated only once, completely ignoring the number <n>, unlike in vim where it's indeed inserted <n> times.
This feature is useful for inserting repeated characters. I currently work around this issue by recording the insert as a macro, and do <n>q instead, but this isn't very efficient.
I would like to implement this feature, but would love to get a green light from the core team first just in case the current behavior is actually intended. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I've prepared quick fix for this issue. Took liberty to do that despite original author willing to do it, but I really wanted to have it fixed asap.
I don't quite get why this operation is so special that is handled differently than other commands. I probably need more context on that particular operation.
My main question here would be - is it possible to define this operation as normal operation (maybe like macro), and not as special case?
With the current implementation, when you press
<n>.
, the last insert is repeated only once, completely ignoring the number<n>
, unlike in vim where it's indeed inserted<n>
times.This feature is useful for inserting repeated characters. I currently work around this issue by recording the insert as a macro, and do
<n>q
instead, but this isn't very efficient.I would like to implement this feature, but would love to get a green light from the core team first just in case the current behavior is actually intended. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: