Ara.T.Howard wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> 
> > Ara.T.Howard wrote:
> >
> > >>IMHO, those folding markers in the source code are uggly :(
> >
> > >i do agree that they're ugly but the usefulness in vim is simply too
> > >great to stop me from using them...
> >
> > Why do you dedent them to column 1?  Anyway, you can use
> > foldmethod=syntax with the vim-ruby.rubyforge.org versions (if not the
> > one in 6.3 (7.0 has been updated I believe)) to do what you°«re doing,
> > which is more or less folding the body of methods,
> 
> i can't deal with the syntax level highlighting... it's too comprehensive.
> what i generally do is start out with no folds
> 
>   class C
>     def initialize
>     end
>   end
> 
> as it grows i'll start added folds into methods.  when i move up to

You know that there are quite a number of options to fine-tune these
kinds of things for syntax-directed folding, right?  For example, look
at 'foldnestmax', which is (again) precisely what you want.

>   module M
>     class C
>     end
>     class B
>     end
>   end
> 
> i start folding classes, etc.  also, the marker method works perfectly for
> perl too...

OK, two things:

1.  Why Perl as an example?

2.  Yes, but we°«re not discussing Perl.

Finally, I use foldmethod=marker by default, but I don°«t use them quite
like you do.  I like markers for exact folding.  Computers have a hard
time getting these things right, but as far as I can tell, they can do
precisely what you want correctly,
        nikolai

-- 
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}