Closed jonasdiemer closed 11 years ago
..much better as easytags gets triggered less often, though it still takes it's good time when it is..
Ahoy there, sorry for barging in. This is a great idea. However your solution assumes that this will be the default behavior, if easytags find the updatetime setting too low. I propose a slightly different solution, however based upon your original idea.
Pull request https://github.com/xolox/vim-easytags/pull/42
Nice that this gets picked up. However, I think that auto adjust is a perfectly reasonable default behavior, so I would make it the default, but also enable the warning by default.
Well, I guess it makes sense to have it automatically wait by default - if updatetime is set to a value lower than easytags_updatetime_min. I think we can assume that it's not intentional (by the majority of users at least); 99% of the time it will be caused by a conflicting plugin or the user has misunderstood the settings. No?
Yes, I would guess that other plug ins ate the major reason. Am 25.03.2013 17:14 schrieb "Kim Christensen" notifications@github.com:
Well, I guess it makes sense to have it automatically wait by default - if updatetime is set to a value lower than easytags_updatetime_min. I think we can assume that it's not intentional (by the majority of users at least); 99% of the time it will be caused by a conflicting plugin or the user has misunderstood the settings. No?
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/xolox/vim-easytags/pull/33#issuecomment-15402950 .
Hi Jonas, Marcel & Kim and thanks for your feedback! A few days ago I released a new version of vim-easytags
which should intelligently handle low 'updatetime' values. I solved it a bit differently from how you suggested it but it should work just as well. I'm closing this pull request now, but if any of you find problems with the new version feel free to report them here or in a new issue.
Please test, I haven't thoroughly tested it (easytags still behaves sluggish in my system).