Is there a reason why the short for 'modifiable' is 'ma' and not 'mo'?
I've entered :h 'mo' and I got E149, so there doesn't seem to be any clash...
Add a comment
|
It is probably because there are two similarly-named options: 'modifiable' (shortened to 'ma') and 'modified' (shortened to 'mod').
-
1But they don't clash... And there are many other pairs of similarly named options which have similar shorthands, e.g.
nu/rnu,wic/wig, and most of all,wcm/wcwhere the difference is in the trailing letter of the former, just like formod/could-have-been-mo. – Enlico Dec 14 '20 at 14:48 -
This type of back-and-forth is why this site is ill-suited to 'why' questions. – wbogacz Dec 14 '20 at 14:58
-
1@wbogacz, in general I agree. But apprently there's a
history-oftag. I guess given that tag, going from why to do you know about the historical decision of xyz? is ok, no? – Enlico Dec 14 '20 at 15:11 -
There seem to be a number of these questions in the past, some answered, and some accepted, so the feeling is clear they are positive. What isn't positive is the point-counterpoint that they can generate. I envision Dan Aykroyd/Jane Curtin. – wbogacz Dec 14 '20 at 16:23
