A couple of questions

Thu Feb 16 10:03:35 CET 2012

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 03:03:07PM +0800, Keshav Kini wrote:
> I have a couple of questions. First, I am wondering if
> evil-want-C-u-scroll is broken. I have set it to t using M-x
> customize-group evil-mode, which causes (custom-set-variables
> '(evil-want-C-u-scroll t)) to appear in my ~/.emacs , but I don't see
> any difference in the behavior of evil. Is there something else I need
> to do in order to make C-u call evil-scroll-up (as C-h k C-d tells me
> that C-d is bound to evil-scroll-down)?

I think you need to set `evil-want-C-u-scroll' to t *before* evil is
loaded in your .emacs file, i.e., something like (setq
evil-want-C-u-scroll t). The reason is that this variable is examined
when evil creates its key-bindings (and only then). Probably we need a
better way to respect the customization options (I would consider the
current behavior as bug).

> Second, I am wondering about the behavior of :q . It seems to me that it
> behaves more like :qa does in vim. According to vim documentation,
> :q[uit] should "Quit the current window.  Quit Vim if this is the last
> window.". So I guess it should be similar to kill-buffer in emacs, no?

kill-buffer would not only close the window but also close the file
and this is not what :q should do. :q in evil closes the current
window or the current frame (if only one window) or Emacs completely
(if only one frame), without closing any file (except in last case, of
course). :qa on the other hand closes Emacs completely (possibly
asking for saving modified buffers). I think this is equivalent to
Vim's behavior.

Frank