[Request] Filtering ranges through an external command about neatvi

[aligrudi]

Aaron G <[email protected]> wrote:

A bigger issue for me is the lack of the ability to filter ranges through an external command. Being able to do that is a rather crucial feature in my opinion, as it gives a lot of power. Is there some kind

Do you mean ! vi-mode command?

of roadmap for this project or a general list of features you want to implement and things you will never do (like split windows for instance)?

My goal was to implement the most commonly used features mentioned in POSIX. I also sometimes included useful and convenient features that do not make the code very complicated.

[aaronNGi]

Do you mean ! vi-mode command?

No, I mean the ex command !. For example :.,+20 !sort or also super useful: :5,10 !fmt -s -p \#. So, opposed to :w !<command>, it takes a range, pipes the lines from that range to an external command and replaces them with the output of <command>.

My goal was to implement the most commonly used features mentioned
in POSIX. I also sometimes included useful and convenient features
that do not make the code very complicated.

That sounds good.

[aligrudi]

Aaron G <[email protected]> wrote:

No, I mean the ex command `!`. For example `:.,+20 !sort` or also super useful: `:5,10 !fmt -s -p \#`. So, opposed to `:w !<command>`, it takes a range, pipes the lines from that range to an external command and replaces them with the output of \<command>.

Please test the following patch: diff --git a/ex.c b/ex.c index da48b05..220c106 100644 --- a/ex.c +++ b/ex.c @@ -735,13 +735,26 @@ static int ec_substitute(char *ec) static int ec_exec(char *ec) { + char loc[EXLEN]; char arg[EXLEN]; + int beg, end; + char *text; + char *rep; ex_modifiedbuffer(NULL); + ex_loc(ec, loc); if (ex_expand(arg, ex_argeol(ec))) return 1; ex_print(NULL); - if (cmd_exec(arg)) + if (!loc[0]) + return cmd_exec(arg); + if (ex_region(loc, &beg, &end)) return 1; + text = lbuf_cp(xb, beg, end); + rep = cmd_pipe(arg, text, 1, 1); + if (rep) + lbuf_edit(xb, rep, beg, end); + free(text); + free(rep); return 0; }

[aaronNGi]

Hey, nice. The function itself works perfectly as far as I can tell. While it makes total sense when running commands normally (:!<command>), from a usability standpoint it makes more sense if there was no call to vi_wait() when using :<range>!<command>.

[aaronNGi]

I noticed something somewhat related: Since '|' is used as the ex command separator, you can't use pipes in external commands. Most vi-clones seem to ignore '|' as the command separator when the ex command is ! and always use it as parameter for the external command. That means you can't run :!echo foo | !echo bar, but maybe that's better than having to escape the '|'?!

[aligrudi]

Aaron G <[email protected]> wrote:

Hey, nice. The function itself works perfectly as far as I can tell. While it makes total sense when running commands normally (`:!<command>`), from a usability standpoint it makes more sense if there was no call to `vi_wait()` when using `:<range>!<command>.

Pushed.

[aligrudi]

Aaron G <[email protected]> wrote:

I noticed something somewhat related: Since '|' is used as the ex command separator, you can't use pipes in external commands. Most vi-clones seem to ignore '|' as the command separator when the ex command is `!` and always use it as parameter for the external command. That means you can't run `:!echo foo | !echo bar`, but maybe that's better than having to escape the '|'?!

OK. Now | is not a command separator for :! command.

[aaronNGi]

OK. Now | is not a command separator for :! command.

Thanks, it works perfectly now!

Something I just noticed, which seems to be unrelated to the last 2 commits: the read ex command fails to read from pipes. I tested r !seq 10 and it does not read anything.

I will close this issue and create a new one for it.