From ray@hebron.connected.com (Ray Berry) From: ray@hebron.connected.com (Ray Berry) Newsgroups: comp.editors Subject: clearing anon vi buffers Date: 16 Dec 1993 11:01:45 -0800 Organization: Ascendant Systems Lines: 10 I happily encountered 'elvis' the other day which seems a fairly high quality effort at a vi clone. I was a bit surprised however at the fact that it clears the anon buffers when you change files via :e etc. From a philosophical point of view I can see how this behavior might be defended. But alas, transporting text between files with the default cut buffer is a habit I had fallen into. I'm wondering if there is any formal rule on this point. I appeal to the vi mavens here for a clarification. -- ray berry kb7ht rjberry@eskimo.com ray@connected.com 73407.3152@compuserve.com From creider@taptet.sscl.uwo.ca (Chet Creider) From: creider@taptet.sscl.uwo.ca (Chet Creider) Newsgroups: comp.editors Subject: Re: clearing anon vi buffers Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 21:22:53 GMT Organization: University of Western Ontario, London Lines: 15 In article ray@hebron.connected.com (Ray Berry) writes: > I happily encountered 'elvis' the other day which seems a fairly >high quality effort at a vi clone. I was a bit surprised however >at the fact that it clears the anon buffers when you change files >via :e etc. From a philosophical point of view I can see how this >behavior might be defended. But alas, transporting text between files >with the default cut buffer is a habit I had fallen into. > I'm wondering if there is any formal rule on this point. Elvis' behaviour is standard. You should use the letter buffers as these are not cleared. E.g. "a10yy to put 10 lines into buffer a, and then (in another file) "ap or "aP. Chet Creider From ray@Celestial.COM (Ray Jones) From: ray@Celestial.COM (Ray Jones) Newsgroups: comp.editors Subject: Re: clearing anon vi buffers Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 19:21:37 GMT Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA Lines: 28 In ray@hebron.connected.com (Ray Berry) writes: > I happily encountered 'elvis' the other day which seems a fairly >high quality effort at a vi clone. I was a bit surprised however >at the fact that it clears the anon buffers when you change files >via :e etc. From a philosophical point of view I can see how this >behavior might be defended. But alas, transporting text between files >with the default cut buffer is a habit I had fallen into. > I'm wondering if there is any formal rule on this point. >I appeal to the vi mavens here for a clarification. I am not sure what you mean by "anon" buffers in vi. If you are refering to the "unnamed" buffer, all vi's that I know of clear this buffer between file when you :e etc To transport buffers between files you need to use any of the 26 "named" buffers [a-z]. To yank text into a named buffer (a in this example) "a4yy -> yank 4 lines into buffer a then you can :e etc and use "ap to put the contents of buffer a into file "etc" -- INTERNET: ray@Celestial.COM | The probability of one or more Ray A. Jones; Celestial Software | spelling errors in this missive 8545 S.E. 68th Street | approaches unity. If this bothers you, Mercer Island, WA 98040;(206) 236-1676 | run it through your spell checker!