gene@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Gene De Lisa) (03/03/91)
I'd like to remove those control-M cookies at the end on lines that you get from CPM to UNIX files. I usually type :%s/control-vcontrol-M$// to can them. When I try to map any key to this sequence I get an error; something about a regular expression. Any hints? -- more direct: vortech!gene@Central.Sun.COM
dattier@ddsw1.MCS.COM (David W. Tamkin) (03/05/91)
gene@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Gene De Lisa) wrote in <1991Mar2.210747.26919@solo.csci.unt.edu>: | I'd like to remove those control-M cookies at the end on lines | that you get from CPM to UNIX files. I usually type | :%s/control-vcontrol-M$// | to can them. When I try to map any key to this sequence I get | an error; something about a regular expression. "No previous regular expression." A mapping is scanned and rescanned, so you may need extra quoting sometimes, more so than you would need when you simply type the command. When you map an ex command to be called during visual mode, it gets scanned at least twice: once on definition, once on execution. So your search string gets rescanned down to nothingness, and a null search string is taken to mean "reuse the last search string." If you've just entered vi and haven't yet done any previous commands (/, ?, :s, :g, for example) that set search strings, you're telling vi to look for something undefined. Hence, "no previous regular expression." | Any hints? Believe it or not, it's [change K to the key you want to map] :map K :%s/ctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-M//ctrl-Vctrl-Mctrl-M That's five ctrl-V's (you could use seven; the effect would be the same) and a ctrl-M in the search string, nothing in the replacement string, one ctrl-V and one ctrl-M after the replacement string to include the CR that the :s command will need, and finally another CR to make the :map command take. You'll see :map K :%s/^V^V^M//^M (three ^V's if you typed seven) when you type it and K K :%s/^V^M//^M when you review your mappings with the ":map" command. David Tamkin Box 7002 Des Plaines IL 60018-7002 708 518 6769 312 693 0591 dattier@ddsw1.mcs.com MCI Mail: 426-1818 CIS: 73720,1570 GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN "Parker Lewis Can't Lose" mailing list: write flamingo-request@ddsw1.mcs.com
gast@maui.cs.ucla.edu (David Gast) (03/05/91)
In article <1991Mar04.162508.352@ddsw1.MCS.COM> dattier@ddsw1.MCS.COM (David W. Tamkin) writes: >gene@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Gene De Lisa) wrote in >| I'd like to remove those control-M cookies at the end on lines >Believe it or not, it's [change K to the key you want to map] >:map K :%s/ctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-M//ctrl-Vctrl-Mctrl-M I don't follow this map at all. Why the two // in the middle? And why the stuff after the two slashes? >That's five ctrl-V's (you could use seven; the effect would be the same) and >a ctrl-M in the search string, nothing in the replacement string, one ctrl-V >and one ctrl-M after the replacement string to include the CR that the :s >command will need, and finally another CR to make the :map command take. >You'll see Well, I don't know about your vi, but this works fine for me: :map X :%s/^V^M$// (where ^ indicates a control key) Further, I do not think you want to put too many ^Vs in or they will be taken literally, not as escape characters. I usually just use this little shell script, however: (I call it stripm) ex - $1 <<! %s/^M$// w! $1 q ! It is practically indestructable. You probably don't need w! instead of w, but it does not hurt. Similarly, you probably don't need the q, but neither of them hurts. David Gast gast@cs.ucla.edu {uunet,ucbvax,rutgers}!{ucla-cs,cs.ucla.edu}!gast
dattier@vpnet.chi.il.us (David W. Tamkin) (03/06/91)
gast@maui.cs.ucla.edu (David Gast) wrote in <1991Mar5.052326.12313@cs.ucla.edu>: | In article <1991Mar04.162508.352@ddsw1.MCS.COM> dattier@ddsw1.MCS.COM | (David W. Tamkin) writes: | >Believe it or not, it's [change K to the key you want to map] | >:map K :%s/ctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-M//ctrl-Vctrl-Mctrl-M | I don't follow this map at all. Why the two // in the middle? And why | the stuff after the two slashes? The two slashes in the middle are the null replacement string. You used it yourself in your own example. Note that I was saying to press ctrl-V five times, not to get five ctrl-V's into the mapping (by pressing it eleven times, the last one to get the CR taken literally). I explained the stuff after the slashes in the article to which you were following up. | Well, I don't know about your vi, but this works fine for me: | :map X :%s/^V^M$// (where ^ indicates a control key) Oh! Look! You have two slashes together! It didn't work for me. It wasn't working for the original asker either. Also, even if it did work, typing X (I wouldn't use X myself because the start-up definition of X is too useful for me to map away) would cause the cursor to go the bottom of the screen, print out the command, and sit there waiting for me to press CR. That's why I included ctrl-V ctrl-M at the end of the mapping. The final ctrl-M, *as*I*said*before*, was just the CR one presses at the end of the :map command; it wasn't part of the definition. | Further, I do not think you want to put too many ^Vs in or they will be | taken literally, not as escape characters. If your vi or your Unix is such that the above mapping would work, then yes, the one I suggested would fail, for some of the ^V's would be taken lite- rally. But vi, apparently, != vi. Too many for you is more than three; too many for me is more than seven. The original asker tried it with one ^V and got told "no previous regular expression," so I think his or her system would require five or seven as those I use do. One or three wouldn't do the trick. It depends on how many times the definition gets scanned. It's frequent to need fewer escapes when you type a command then when you map a key to it and not impossible, so I understand, to need more escapes when you include a mapping in your .exrc than when you type the :map command during an edit. | I usually just use this little shell script, however: (I call it stripm) | | ex - $1 <<! | %s/^M$// Oh, look, two slashes together! | w! $1 | q | ! | | It is practically indestructable. You probably don't need w! instead of w, | but it does not hurt. Similarly, you probably don't need the q, but neither | of them hurts. You do need a better spell-checker, however, Mr. Gast. David Tamkin PO Box 7002 Des Plaines IL 60018-7002 dattier@vpnet.chi.il.us GEnie:D.W.TAMKIN CIS:73720,1570 MCIMail:426-1818 708 518 6769 312 693 0591
fitz@mml0.meche.rpi.edu (Brian Fitzgerald) (03/08/91)
Gene De Lisa writes: >I'd like to remove those control-M cookies at the end on lines >that you get from CPM to UNIX files. I usually type >:%s/control-vcontrol-M$// A common approach to this problem is to use tr. For example, tr -d '\015' < cpmfile > unixfile I realize that this does not directly answer the original question of how to do this with an interactive editor. Depending on the job to be done, sometimes the filters (tr, grep, sed, awk and friends) are the best way to go. Brian Fitzgerald
cliff@demon.co.uk (Cliff Stanford) (03/09/91)
On a similar problem, can anyone *please* tell me why the following
does not work?
map! ^F ^V^M { /* ^V^[?(^V^MyB``pa */ ^V^[yypr}O
It is supposed to take the following line type
int xyzzy()
and make:
int xyzzy()
{ /* xyzzy */
} /* xyzzy */
what it does is to make:
int xyzzy()
{ /* a */
} /* a */
Thanks,
Cliff.
--
Cliff Stanford Email: cliff@demon.co.uk (Work)
Demon Systems Limited cms@demon.co.uk (Home)
42 Hendon Lane Phone: 081-349 0063 (Office)
London N3 1TT England 0860 375870 (Mobile)gast@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (03/09/91)
In article <1991Mar06.004617.19066@vpnet.chi.il.us> dattier@vpnet.chi.il.us (David W. Tamkin) writes: >gast@maui.cs.ucla.edu (David Gast) wrote in <1991Mar5.052326.12313@cs.ucla.edu>: >| In article <1991Mar04.162508.352@ddsw1.MCS.COM> dattier@ddsw1.MCS.COM >| (David W. Tamkin) writes: >| >:map K :%s/ctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-Vctrl-M//ctrl-Vctrl-Mctrl-M I confess that I did not read the above as carefully as I should have. I saw the typical ^ used as control key later in your posting and then saw a lot of letters after the slashes and wondered what the hay? I also, although I don't know why, interpreted some of the V's as \/. After rereading your original posting I see you were just using user friendly notation--that is, the notation used by the original sender. I was not wondering about the purpose of two slashes together; I couldn't see why they would be in the middle of the :s command rather than at or near the end. I see now that it is only the unusual (but user friendly) notation that threw me off. >Also, even if it did work, typing X (I wouldn't use X myself because the >start-up definition of X is too useful for me to map away) would cause the >cursor to go the bottom of the screen, print out the command, and sit there >waiting for me to press CR. I used X because it frequently means pick any value you want. Forgive me. Anyway, I hardly ever use X when I am typing because hx (or dh) is faster to type than shift-X. There might be a use for X, however. You are correct that the implicit ^M at the end of my macro was not shown--I think it was because of the way I transfered the macro from one window to the other with X (or is that hx? :-) .) I know that I did not type a return to execute it at any rate. In actuality, I would probably bind this map to a function key. >| Further, I do not think you want to put too many ^Vs in or they will be >| taken literally, not as escape characters. >If your vi or your Unix is such that the above mapping would work, then yes, >the one I suggested would fail, for some of the ^V's would be taken lite- >rally. I interpreted your posting to say that the user could use 5 or 7 ^V's and it would not make a difference. My point was that it probably would. (I don't know the precise implementation being used). Anyway, here is the interesting part and the reason for my posting. I tried the exact same map last night via modem and I got all sorts of odd error messages, but sometimes it worked. I also tried it today. Sometimes weird error messages; sometimes it worked; still others it worked but provided a weird error message as well. To make matters odder, one session and the same map frequently gave more than one response with the same input data. My conclusion is that there seems to be some bug in vi for this problem and I would recommend that you use ex (or tr or sed or some other command) unless you are sure you have a non-buggy vi. And I would suggest that if possible you make this filter part of the software you use for getting CPM files. (A couple days ago we had a system crash and it appears that one of the versions of vi we had was lost. My previous posting used that vi, this posting uses the other vi.) David
weimer@garden.kodak.COM (Gary Weimer (588-0953)) (03/11/91)
In article <1991Mar08.181732.2458@demon.co.uk>, cliff@demon.co.uk (Cliff Stanford) writes: |> On a similar problem, can anyone *please* tell me why the following |> does not work? |> map! ^F ^V^M { /* ^V^[?(^V^MyB``pa */ ^V^[yypr}O |> It is supposed to take the following line type |> int xyzzy() |> and make: |> int xyzzy() |> { /* xyzzy */ |> |> } /* xyzzy */ |> what it does is to make: |> int xyzzy() |> { /* a */ |> |> } /* a */ It works fine in my vi (SunOS 4.1.1). You might want to try using named buffers, i.e.: map! ^F ^V^M { /* ^V^[?(^V^M"ayB``"apA */ ^V^[yypr}O weimer@ssd.kodak.com ( Gary Weimer )
dattier@vpnet.chi.il.us (David W. Tamkin) (03/12/91)
gast@lanai.cs.ucla.edu wrote in <1991Mar9.053949.9736@cs.ucla.edu>: | I used X because it frequently means pick any value you want. Forgive me. Yes, I understood, but remember, I was aiming to explain it to someone who might have been a beginner. | I interpreted your posting to say that the user could use 5 or 7 ^V's and | it would not make a difference. My point was that it probably would. (I | don't know the precise implementation being used). I tried it on two sites I call: on both, five or seven ^V presses (two or three caret+V pairs on the screen) worked and one or three gave the "no previous regular expression" error that the original poster complained about. As for my unexpectedly user-friendly notation, I was carrying through the original poster's method. Moreover, to show ^M, no matter how well people know that it means ctrl-M and not caret+M, always leaves the question of whether you meant to press ctrl-M or to press ctrl-V ctrl-M so that a ctrl-M is entered. (The same goes for ^V and ^[.) Yes, :%!tr -d '\015' is a better way to solve the problem (assuming that the only CR's in the file will be the ones in the EOL's). So are dtou and lef, if you have them (or either). David Tamkin PO Box 7002 Des Plaines IL 60018-7002 dattier@vpnet.chi.il.us GEnie:D.W.TAMKIN CIS:73720,1570 MCIMail:426-1818 708 518 6769 312 693 0591