Open blueyed opened 7 years ago
Alternatively, it might be good to define/configure the order of signs, so that the |vcs| related ones would be placed after the more generic marks?!
Sign definitions have a level field. For g:quickfixsigns_class_marks this is 4, for g:quickfixsigns_class_qfl it is 7. If you want qfl to take precedence, set it to 3 -- should work. Currently there is no way to configure just the level field easily.
What I've meant is to merge them, which in this case would use the background from the QuickFixSignsDiffAdd
highlight and the text from the other mark.
This would allow for having added/changed lines being highlighted always.
For this to work there would need to be intermediate texthl classes for the signs, e.g. QFS_WarningMsg
(mentioned in TODO), and then e.g. QFS_WarningMsg_VCSAdd
(which would take the bg
from QuickFixSignsDiffAdd
).
In case a line is then added, but was also the one being last changed, it would use QFS_Mark_._VCSAdd
, which would display as .
with a green background.
It's not trivial, but hopefully you get what I mean at least?! :)
I think merging is a bad idea. Signs are a pain anyway. I think you should use the level
mechanism but ... Anyway, I realized that level
doesn't work as it is supposed to. It seems that unneeded signs aren't removed properly. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to come up with a solution for this.
With the following signs for the same line, it would be nice to get the background of the "VCS ADD" sign:
Currently only the
.
sign is visible, which has no background and therefore no indication about this line being changed (with regard to thevcsdiff
module).To indicate that this line was added, it might be nice to have a sign there that merges
QFS_Mark_.
andQFS_VCS_CHANGE
maybe, i.e. using thetext
fromQFS_Mark_.
with thetexthl
fromQFS_VCS_CHANGE
?!Alternatively, it might be good to define/configure the order of signs, so that the
vcs
related ones would be placed after the more generic marks?!