freebsd-nq/contrib/nvi/vi/v_undo.c
Baptiste Daroussin 110d525ec6 Update nvi to 2.2.0
Main changes:
* Vim-style expandtab option
* Provides Turkish translation
* Backspace now deletes \ rather than being escaped
* T during motion commands is now VI-compatible
* Encoding related fixes, such as UTF-8 detection
* Fixed a number of memory management issues

MFC after:	3 weeks
2020-09-09 08:38:47 +00:00

132 lines
4.2 KiB
C

/*-
* Copyright (c) 1992, 1993, 1994
* The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
* Copyright (c) 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996
* Keith Bostic. All rights reserved.
*
* See the LICENSE file for redistribution information.
*/
#include "config.h"
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/queue.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
#include <bitstring.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <limits.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include "../common/common.h"
#include "vi.h"
/*
* v_Undo -- U
* Undo changes to this line.
*
* PUBLIC: int v_Undo(SCR *, VICMD *);
*/
int
v_Undo(SCR *sp, VICMD *vp)
{
/*
* Historically, U reset the cursor to the first column in the line
* (not the first non-blank). This seems a bit non-intuitive, but,
* considering that we may have undone multiple changes, anything
* else (including the cursor position stored in the logging records)
* is going to appear random.
*/
vp->m_final.cno = 0;
/*
* !!!
* Set up the flags so that an immediately subsequent 'u' will roll
* forward, instead of backward. In historic vi, a 'u' following a
* 'U' redid all of the changes to the line. Given that the user has
* explicitly discarded those changes by entering 'U', it seems likely
* that the user wants something between the original and end forms of
* the line, so starting to replay the changes seems the best way to
* get to there.
*/
F_SET(sp->ep, F_UNDO);
sp->ep->lundo = BACKWARD;
return (log_setline(sp));
}
/*
* v_undo -- u
* Undo the last change.
*
* PUBLIC: int v_undo(SCR *, VICMD *);
*/
int
v_undo(SCR *sp, VICMD *vp)
{
EXF *ep;
/* Set the command count. */
VIP(sp)->u_ccnt = sp->ccnt;
/*
* !!!
* In historic vi, 'u' toggled between "undo" and "redo", i.e. 'u'
* undid the last undo. However, if there has been a change since
* the last undo/redo, we always do an undo. To make this work when
* the user can undo multiple operations, we leave the old semantic
* unchanged, but make '.' after a 'u' do another undo/redo operation.
* This has two problems.
*
* The first is that 'u' didn't set '.' in historic vi. So, if a
* user made a change, realized it was in the wrong place, does a
* 'u' to undo it, moves to the right place and then does '.', the
* change was reapplied. To make this work, we only apply the '.'
* to the undo command if it's the command immediately following an
* undo command. See vi/vi.c:getcmd() for the details.
*
* The second is that the traditional way to view the numbered cut
* buffers in vi was to enter the commands "1pu.u.u.u. which will
* no longer work because the '.' immediately follows the 'u' command.
* Since we provide a much better method of viewing buffers, and
* nobody can think of a better way of adding in multiple undo, this
* remains broken.
*
* !!!
* There is change to historic practice for the final cursor position
* in this implementation. In historic vi, if an undo was isolated to
* a single line, the cursor moved to the start of the change, and
* then, subsequent 'u' commands would not move it again. (It has been
* pointed out that users used multiple undo commands to get the cursor
* to the start of the changed text.) Nvi toggles between the cursor
* position before and after the change was made. One final issue is
* that historic vi only did this if the user had not moved off of the
* line before entering the undo command; otherwise, vi would move the
* cursor to the most attractive position on the changed line.
*
* It would be difficult to match historic practice in this area. You
* not only have to know that the changes were isolated to one line,
* but whether it was the first or second undo command as well. And,
* to completely match historic practice, we'd have to track users line
* changes, too. This isn't worth the effort.
*/
ep = sp->ep;
if (!F_ISSET(ep, F_UNDO)) {
F_SET(ep, F_UNDO);
ep->lundo = BACKWARD;
} else if (!F_ISSET(vp, VC_ISDOT))
ep->lundo = ep->lundo == BACKWARD ? FORWARD : BACKWARD;
switch (ep->lundo) {
case BACKWARD:
return (log_backward(sp, &vp->m_final));
case FORWARD:
return (log_forward(sp, &vp->m_final));
default:
abort();
}
/* NOTREACHED */
}