https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=375160
--- Comment #6 from Christoph Cullmann <cullm...@kde.org> --- (In reply to Jan Paul Batrina from comment #5) > I think it makes sense since we add non-vimode commands already > (https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/ktexteditor/-/blob/master/src/vimode/ > emulatedcommandbar/commandmode.cpp#L46), and excluding some (e.g. the char > command) would be an annoying inconsistency since switching to non-vimode > will be needed just to access those kate commands. > > For conflicting commands, I think it would be safer to prefer the vimode > versions if present. That means in the attached patch, I think that the kate > commands should be added BEFORE the vimode commands since commands with the > same string will overwrite the previous command > (https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/ktexteditor/-/blob/master/src/vimode/ > emulatedcommandbar/commandmode.cpp#L60. > > I haven't checked yet if `KateCmd::self()->commands()` has commands that > have already been added by the previous cmds.push_back calls. Are you interested in working on this? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
