/prog/ - VIM + GVIM ^M Characters EVERYWHERE

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 17:56

Yeah, so I do a reinstall of Linux and open vim and see ^M

EVERYWHERE,

So Installed GVIM and got the same thing,

Never had this happen so don't know how to get rid of it.

halp

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:02

This'll remove them:
echo ^Mn u | tr 'M^nu' 'f\-r~' | xargs rm

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:18

stop putting ^M all over your files.
use :1,$s/^M//g to get rid of them. note that you need to type a ^M character there, not the two characters ^ and M.
also, vim sucks. use vi instead.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:37

http://ex-vi.sourceforge.net/
Actual vi for real /prog/rammers

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:42

GNU EMACS DOESN'T HAVE THIS PROBLEM

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:53

>>5
GNU EMACS also doesn't have a decent text editor.

>>4
this.
or if you're an IDEfag, elvis > vim.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:00

>>5
Not displaying characters that are there is a bug, not a feature. It leads to idiots like >>1 thinking non-broken editors are displaying things wrong when in fact it's the fact that they're Windows users that's to blame.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:07

>>6
GNU EMACS also doesn't have a decent text editor.
Vimfag doesn't know his Emacs modes.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:27

>>8
are you implying that there's an eMacs mode that implements all of vi's functionality?

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:45

>>9
Perfect compatibility with Vi is possible but not desirable¹.

_{¹ http://www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/RZ/software/emacs/viper/viper_3.html}

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:51

>>10
http://www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/RZ/software/emacs/viper/viper_3.html#SEC13
:se list requires modification of the display code for Emacs, so it is not implemented. A useful alternative is cat -t -e file. Unfortunately, it cannot be used directly inside Emacs, since Emacs will obdurately change `^I' back to normal tabs.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:59

>>9
Are you implying that most of vi's functionality is desirable? Vi is entirely the wrong way to make an editor.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 20:10

>>12
that may be so, but it's better than emacs and notepad.exe clones.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 22:20

>>13
Vi is better than Emacs.
I think you've got a bug in your post.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 22:38

>>14
s/bug/win/g

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 23:50

>>14
the bug is in emacs. see >>7.

VIM + GVIM ^M Characters EVERYWHERE

1 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 17:56

2 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:02

3 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:18

4 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:37

5 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:42

6 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 18:53

7 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:00

8 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:07

9 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:27

10 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:45

11 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:51

12 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 19:59

13 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 20:10

14 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 22:20

15 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 22:38

16 Name: Anonymous 2009-03-30 23:50