Titus von der Malsburg <[email protected]> writes:
I think there are two issues:
- the variable size of undo steps - the error when redoing.
Yes, but one makes the other more serious.
The first issue arises from the fact that Evil considers anything that happens from entering insert mode until leaving it as one edit.
That was I thought until I observed, multiple times, how undo worked one char at a time after writing some text. No mode change, no cursor movement, just writing text and then undoing. I'm not so sure about this, but I also observed how undo removes multiple chunks of text that were written with mode changes and cursor movements in between. [snip]
The second issue is the error that you're observing when redoing. I never encountered this problem.
This happens every other month, but it hurts. There are other problems on undo-tree, although not of the data-loss type. It looks quite unreliable to me. IIRC the author explained on emacs-devel that some characteristics of Emacs' undo implementation made things difficult for him. I still don't know if not using undo-tree has consequences on Evil's behavior, apart from going back to traditional Emacs undo features, but let's assume that there is no problem, so I'll ditch undo-tree.