4 ms·

> I have bindings that allow me to execute the current line or paragraph under the cursor in the underlying shell and then inject the result into the current bu

> I have bindings that allow me to execute the current line or paragraph under the cursor in the underlying shell and then inject the result into the current buffer. As @kps mentioned in a peer comment, using the built-in ex[0] '!' command can do what the vim script above does. For example, to execute the line where the cursor is currently placed and replace the same line's content using POSIX shell: :. !sh To do the same with multiple lines I like to mark the first command, then the last, and run: :'a,'b !sh Where the "a" buffer is the first command and the "b" buffer is the last command in this example. There are many other ways to specify ranges too. I recommend beginning with vim's builtin help: :help range And going from there. 0 - https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ex&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+13.2-RELEASE+and+Ports&arch=default&format=html https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ex&apropos=0&sekti...

kps 3y ago
^ What they said. (I was terse on my way to bed yesterday.) The big benefit of `!` is that, like anything else in visual mode, it works with motion operators. I often write fragments of shell, e.g. to generate something repetitive, and run it with `!!` (doubling for the current line, same as things like `dd` or `yy`), `!}` (block), or `!G' (rest of file).
ckw 3y ago
First, I don't want to type <shift><semicolon><period><space><shift><1><s><h><enter>. I want to type at most two characters, because I do this a lot. I chose sx, but really any good <leader><foo> combination would be fine. Note they're both on the same hand; I had pretty bad rsi for a couple years and was typing almost exclusively with my left hand. Second, :. !sh eats the command. I want the command to remain in place in the buffer. Imagine you have a buffer full of useful commands that you use repeatedly with minor tweaks, and you use the output of those commands to write other bespoke commands, and so on. Third, :. !sh leaves you sitting above the result of the command. I rarely want to be there. I want to be positioned right after the result, on a new line, like my buffer is a shell-- I see the end of the result and can immediately begin typing the next command.
- AdieuToLogic 3y ago
  >First, I don't want to type <shift><semicolon><period><space><shift><1><s><h><enter>. I want to type at most two characters, because I do this a lot. I chose sx, but really any good <leader><foo> combination would be fine. Note they're both on the same hand; I had pretty bad rsi for a couple years and was typing almost exclusively with my left hand. > Second, :. !sh eats the command. I want the command to remain in place in the buffer. Imagine you have a buffer full of useful commands that you use repeatedly with minor tweaks, and you use the output of those commands to write other bespoke commands, and so on. map <leader>sx yyp:.!sh<CR> > Third, :. !sh leaves you sitting above the result of the command. I rarely want to be there. I want to be positioned right after the result, on a new line, like my buffer is a shell-- I see the end of the result and can immediately begin typing the next command. map <leader>sx o<ESC>mtkyyp:.!sh<CR>'t HTH

kps 3y ago

^ What they said. (I was terse on my way to bed yesterday.) The big benefit of `!` is that, like anything else in visual mode, it works with motion operators. I often write fragments of shell, e.g. to generate something repetitive, and run it with `!!` (doubling for the current line, same as things like `dd` or `yy`), `!}` (block), or `!G' (rest of file).

ckw 3y ago

First, I don't want to type <shift><semicolon><period><space><shift><1><s><h><enter>. I want to type at most two characters, because I do this a lot. I chose sx, but really any good <leader><foo> combination would be fine. Note they're both on the same hand; I had pretty bad rsi for a couple years and was typing almost exclusively with my left hand. Second, :. !sh eats the command. I want the command to remain in place in the buffer. Imagine you have a buffer full of useful commands that you use repeatedly with minor tweaks, and you use the output of those commands to write other bespoke commands, and so on. Third, :. !sh leaves you sitting above the result of the command. I rarely want to be there. I want to be positioned right after the result, on a new line, like my buffer is a shell-- I see the end of the result and can immediately begin typing the next command.

AdieuToLogic 3y ago
>First, I don't want to type <shift><semicolon><period><space><shift><1><s><h><enter>. I want to type at most two characters, because I do this a lot. I chose sx, but really any good <leader><foo> combination would be fine. Note they're both on the same hand; I had pretty bad rsi for a couple years and was typing almost exclusively with my left hand. > Second, :. !sh eats the command. I want the command to remain in place in the buffer. Imagine you have a buffer full of useful commands that you use repeatedly with minor tweaks, and you use the output of those commands to write other bespoke commands, and so on. map <leader>sx yyp:.!sh<CR> > Third, :. !sh leaves you sitting above the result of the command. I rarely want to be there. I want to be positioned right after the result, on a new line, like my buffer is a shell-- I see the end of the result and can immediately begin typing the next command. map <leader>sx o<ESC>mtkyyp:.!sh<CR>'t HTH