supertab inserts two lines when hitting cr/enter/return about supertab

[ervandew]

The quick fix is to add the following to your vimrc:

let g:SuperTabCrMapping = 0

Before doing that though can you run the following in vim and send me the result:

:verbose imap <cr>

[imajes]

I couldn't figure out how to copy this, so here's the output of the imap:

http://x.imaj.es/E9N1

the mapping fix worked great.. thanks

On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 01:07, Eric Van Dewoestine
[email protected]
wrote:

The quick fix is to add the following to your vimrc:

   let g:SuperTabCrMapping = 0

Before doing that though can you run the following in vim and send me the result:

   :verbose imap

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#32 (comment)

James Cox,
Consultant, Raconteur, Photographer, Entrepreneur
t: [phone]  e: [email protected] w: http://imaj.es/
talk: http://twitter.com/imajes photos: http://flickr.com/imajes

[ervandew]

I can reproduce your issue if I add the following mapping to my vimrc:

imap <CR> <C-G>u<CR>

What both supertab and endwise do before adding their own <CR> mapping, is to first look for an existing one, and if it exists, chain theirs to that one. Without the above mapping, both supertab and endwise will chain together successfully. Do you have a mapping like that in your vimrc? One way to track it down would be to temporarily remove endwise (and keep g:SuperTabCrMapping set to 0) then open vim and run the same :verbose imap <cr> which will let you know where that mapping was last set.

[imajes]

Yes, I have this mapping…. but i'm not sure why. :(

should i just remove it?

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 18:37, Eric Van Dewoestine
[email protected]
wrote:

I can reproduce your issue if I add the following mapping to my vimrc:

   imap u

What both supertab and endwise do before adding their own <CR> mapping, is to first look for an existing one, and if it exists, chain theirs to that one.  Without the above mapping, both supertab and endwise will chain together successfully. Do you have a mapping like that in your vimrc? One way to track it down would be to temporarily remove endwise (and keep g:SuperTabCrMapping set to 0) then open vim and run the same :verbose imap <cr> which will let you know where that mapping was last set.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#32 (comment)

James Cox,
Consultant, Raconteur, Photographer, Entrepreneur
t: [phone]  e: [email protected] w: http://imaj.es/
talk: http://twitter.com/imajes photos: http://flickr.com/imajes

[ervandew]

It's a weird mapping since it triggers a new undo sequence every time you hit <cr> while in insert mode (so when you exit insert mode each undo will only undo up to the last <cr> during your insert sequence). You could comment it out and see if you encounter the situation that motivated you to add it. If you have no need for supertab's <cr> mapping, then I guess it's not currently causing you issues, but it could very well cause a problem with some other plugin down the line, hard to say.

I'm going to close this ticket since although supertab could look for and remove an undo break from the mapping, doing so probably isn't a good idea since it may be there for good reason and going down the path of removing any disruptive user created mapping could lead to a lot of potential problems.

[imajes]

Agreed- and for the record, this was sourced from another vim users's
.vimrc, so not everything has good probity :)

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 19:13, Eric Van Dewoestine
[email protected]
wrote:

It's a weird mapping since it triggers a new undo sequence every time you hit <cr> while in insert mode (so when you exit insert mode each undo will only undo up to the last <cr> during your insert sequence). You could comment it out and see if you encounter the situation that motivated you to add it. If you have no need for supertab's <cr> mapping, then I guess it's not currently causing you issues, but it could very well cause a problem with some other plugin down the line, hard to say.

I'm going to close this ticket since although supertab could look for and remove an undo break from the mapping, doing so probably isn't a good idea since it may be there for good reason and going down the path of removing any disruptive user created mapping could lead to a lot of potential problems.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#32 (comment)

James Cox,
Consultant, Raconteur, Photographer, Entrepreneur
t: [phone]  e: [email protected] w: http://imaj.es/
talk: http://twitter.com/imajes photos: http://flickr.com/imajes