mirrors/neovim
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/neovim/neovim.git synced 2025-10-05 01:16:31 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

vim-patch:9.1.0082: Redrawing can be improved when deleting lines with 'cursorline'

Browse Source 
Problem:  Redrawing can be improved when deleting lines with 'cursorline'.
Solution: Use smarter invalidation and adjustment.  Remove unnecessary
          UPD_VALID as it is already set at the top of the loop.  Make
          the test for vim/vim#4862 fail without the fix.
          (zeertzjq)

closes: vim/vim#13986

7ce34c9a94
This commit is contained in:
zeertzjq
2024-02-08 19:07:59 +08:00
parent 1f9da3d083
commit 1c2b9e8dd8
2 changed files with 19 additions and 20 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

19
src/nvim/change.c
View File

@@ -353,20 +353,19 @@ static void changed_common(buf_T *buf, linenr_T lnum, colnr_T col, linenr_T lnum
}
// If lines have been added or removed, relative numbering always
// requires a redraw.
// requires an update even if cursor didn't move.
if (wp->w_p_rnu && xtra != 0) {
wp->w_last_cursor_lnum_rnu = 0;
redraw_later(wp, UPD_VALID);
}
// Cursor line highlighting probably need to be updated with
// "UPD_VALID" if it's below the change.
// If the cursor line is inside the change we need to redraw more.
if (wp->w_p_cul) {
if (xtra == 0) {
redraw_later(wp, UPD_VALID);
} else if (lnum <= wp->w_last_cursorline) {
redraw_later(wp, UPD_SOME_VALID);
if (wp->w_p_cul && wp->w_last_cursorline >= lnum) {
if (wp->w_last_cursorline < lnume) {
// If 'cursorline' was inside the change, it has already
// been invalidated in w_lines[] by the loop above.
wp->w_last_cursorline = 0;
} else {
// If 'cursorline' was below the change, adjust its lnum.
wp->w_last_cursorline += xtra;
}
}
}