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
I have two ideas of how to improve the increment/decrement feature ( and ).
First of all I think it should increment the next number on the line, not just if you're over the number. The main problem with this is if there are two different numbers on the same line. But then you can just jump to the number, which you would have to do anyway with the current system. Basically its quite a big upside with little downside.
I also think one should be able to toggle a few other things than just numbers, for example switching between true/false. There also are not that many true/false statements and numbers that they would clog up the system. And worst case scenario you have to jump the thing you'd like to change, like it is now.
I'd also argue for making the function global, like what we did with the "f" function from vim. Since its quite unlikely that you mistakenly use it and that the consequences of doing so are very mild.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Previous discussion on jumping to next number: #1027 (comment). I wonder if this should be revisited, since it's quite handy to have it warp to next number.
antoyo
added a commit
to antoyo/helix
that referenced
this issue
Mar 9, 2022
I have two ideas of how to improve the increment/decrement feature ( and ).
First of all I think it should increment the next number on the line, not just if you're over the number. The main problem with this is if there are two different numbers on the same line. But then you can just jump to the number, which you would have to do anyway with the current system. Basically its quite a big upside with little downside.
I also think one should be able to toggle a few other things than just numbers, for example switching between true/false. There also are not that many true/false statements and numbers that they would clog up the system. And worst case scenario you have to jump the thing you'd like to change, like it is now.
I'd also argue for making the function global, like what we did with the "f" function from vim. Since its quite unlikely that you mistakenly use it and that the consequences of doing so are very mild.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: