xref: /openbsd/usr.bin/vi/vi/v_undo.c (revision 486aa1f0)
1 /*	$OpenBSD: v_undo.c,v 1.6 2014/11/12 04:28:41 bentley Exp $	*/
2 
3 /*-
4  * Copyright (c) 1992, 1993, 1994
5  *	The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.
6  * Copyright (c) 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996
7  *	Keith Bostic.  All rights reserved.
8  *
9  * See the LICENSE file for redistribution information.
10  */
11 
12 #include "config.h"
13 
14 #include <sys/types.h>
15 #include <sys/queue.h>
16 #include <sys/time.h>
17 
18 #include <bitstring.h>
19 #include <errno.h>
20 #include <limits.h>
21 #include <stdio.h>
22 #include <stdlib.h>
23 #include <string.h>
24 
25 #include "../common/common.h"
26 #include "vi.h"
27 
28 /*
29  * v_Undo -- U
30  *	Undo changes to this line.
31  *
32  * PUBLIC: int v_Undo(SCR *, VICMD *);
33  */
34 int
v_Undo(SCR * sp,VICMD * vp)35 v_Undo(SCR *sp, VICMD *vp)
36 {
37 	/*
38 	 * Historically, U reset the cursor to the first column in the line
39 	 * (not the first non-blank).  This seems a bit non-intuitive, but,
40 	 * considering that we may have undone multiple changes, anything
41 	 * else (including the cursor position stored in the logging records)
42 	 * is going to appear random.
43 	 */
44 	vp->m_final.cno = 0;
45 
46 	/*
47 	 * !!!
48 	 * Set up the flags so that an immediately subsequent 'u' will roll
49 	 * forward, instead of backward.  In historic vi, a 'u' following a
50 	 * 'U' redid all of the changes to the line.  Given that the user has
51 	 * explicitly discarded those changes by entering 'U', it seems likely
52 	 * that the user wants something between the original and end forms of
53 	 * the line, so starting to replay the changes seems the best way to
54 	 * get to there.
55 	 */
56 	F_SET(sp->ep, F_UNDO);
57 	sp->ep->lundo = BACKWARD;
58 
59 	return (log_setline(sp));
60 }
61 
62 /*
63  * v_undo -- u
64  *	Undo the last change.
65  *
66  * PUBLIC: int v_undo(SCR *, VICMD *);
67  */
68 int
v_undo(SCR * sp,VICMD * vp)69 v_undo(SCR *sp, VICMD *vp)
70 {
71 	EXF *ep;
72 
73 	/* Set the command count. */
74 	VIP(sp)->u_ccnt = sp->ccnt;
75 
76 	/*
77 	 * !!!
78 	 * In historic vi, 'u' toggled between "undo" and "redo", i.e. 'u'
79 	 * undid the last undo.  However, if there has been a change since
80 	 * the last undo/redo, we always do an undo.  To make this work when
81 	 * the user can undo multiple operations, we leave the old semantic
82 	 * unchanged, but make '.' after a 'u' do another undo/redo operation.
83 	 * This has two problems.
84 	 *
85 	 * The first is that 'u' didn't set '.' in historic vi.  So, if a
86 	 * user made a change, realized it was in the wrong place, does a
87 	 * 'u' to undo it, moves to the right place and then does '.', the
88 	 * change was reapplied.  To make this work, we only apply the '.'
89 	 * to the undo command if it's the command immediately following an
90 	 * undo command.  See vi/vi.c:getcmd() for the details.
91 	 *
92 	 * The second is that the traditional way to view the numbered cut
93 	 * buffers in vi was to enter the commands "1pu.u.u.u. which will
94 	 * no longer work because the '.' immediately follows the 'u' command.
95 	 * Since we provide a much better method of viewing buffers, and
96 	 * nobody can think of a better way of adding in multiple undo, this
97 	 * remains broken.
98 	 *
99 	 * !!!
100 	 * There is change to historic practice for the final cursor position
101 	 * in this implementation.  In historic vi, if an undo was isolated to
102 	 * a single line, the cursor moved to the start of the change, and
103 	 * then, subsequent 'u' commands would not move it again. (It has been
104 	 * pointed out that users used multiple undo commands to get the cursor
105 	 * to the start of the changed text.)  Nvi toggles between the cursor
106 	 * position before and after the change was made.  One final issue is
107 	 * that historic vi only did this if the user had not moved off of the
108 	 * line before entering the undo command; otherwise, vi would move the
109 	 * cursor to the most attractive position on the changed line.
110 	 *
111 	 * It would be difficult to match historic practice in this area. You
112 	 * not only have to know that the changes were isolated to one line,
113 	 * but whether it was the first or second undo command as well.  And,
114 	 * to completely match historic practice, we'd have to track users line
115 	 * changes, too.  This isn't worth the effort.
116 	 */
117 	ep = sp->ep;
118 	if (!F_ISSET(ep, F_UNDO)) {
119 		F_SET(ep, F_UNDO);
120 		ep->lundo = BACKWARD;
121 	} else if (!F_ISSET(vp, VC_ISDOT))
122 		ep->lundo = ep->lundo == BACKWARD ? FORWARD : BACKWARD;
123 
124 	switch (ep->lundo) {
125 	case BACKWARD:
126 		return (log_backward(sp, &vp->m_final));
127 	case FORWARD:
128 		return (log_forward(sp, &vp->m_final));
129 	default:
130 		abort();
131 	}
132 	/* NOTREACHED */
133 }
134