switch#NormalizedCase and word boundaries about switch.vim HOT 3 CLOSED

The issue comes from the fact that, in a list, every item is both a pattern and a substitution. The code is supposed to switch from the first to the second and from the second to the first, which means s/<or>/<and>/ and the replacement gets the < characters, because they're not special in the replacement part.

aaahh of course, thanks that makes total sense.

And the helpers work perfectly as well. I just put them to good use. (And probably agreed on avoiding parametrizing unless there are more axes to deal with).

Thanks again for both the tip and the plugin!

from switch.vim.

Thank you for your kind words :).

Regarding the issue, I don't think the problem is with case normalization -- in fact, if you put ['\<or\>', '\<and\>'], I think you'll get the same result, or at least I get it locally.

The issue comes from the fact that, in a list, every item is both a pattern and a substitution. The code is supposed to switch from the first to the second and from the second to the first, which means s/\<or\>/\<and\>/ and the replacement gets the < characters, because they're not special in the replacement part. The list version is useful for simple transformations, but doesn't work that hot when you need to use regexes.

What I can recommend in this case is using the hash form, which is basically what the plugin generates, without the \< parts:

let g:switch_custom_definitions = [
      \   { '\C\<and\>': 'or', '\C\<or\>': 'and' },
      \   { '\C\<And\>': 'Or', '\C\<Or\>': 'And' },
      \   { '\C\<AND\>': 'OR', '\C\<OR\>': 'AND' },
      \ ]

Having said that, It feels like it'd be useful to also make a helper like switch#NormalizedCaseWords to also add the word boundaries. (Plus a switch#Words one for the same thing without case normalization). I'll try it out.

from switch.vim.

I've tried adding two more helper functions -- take a look, try them out, let me know what you think:

I could add one parameterized function instead, but I'd like to keep the old one for compatibility, so I've held off. Plus, the more "programmatic" of an interface I come up with, the harder it might be for someone with little Vimscript experience.

In the future, if there's a third dimension to parameterize by, I'll introduce a common function with a dict parameter and keep the old ones as fronts.

from switch.vim.