-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Follow rustlings watch
with editor by opening source files in the same order
#281
Comments
Tuxified
added a commit
to Tuxified/rustlings
that referenced
this issue
Apr 7, 2020
As indicated in rust-lang#259 , I found it confusing to have 2 comments as the code wouldn't compile unless I solved both issues (I used the script from rust-lang#281 to remove a comment and use `:wn` to go to next exercise, hence this tripped me).
pedantic79
pushed a commit
to pedantic79/rustlings
that referenced
this issue
Apr 11, 2020
As indicated in rust-lang#259 , I found it confusing to have 2 comments as the code wouldn't compile unless I solved both issues (I used the script from rust-lang#281 to remove a comment and use `:wn` to go to next exercise, hence this tripped me).
MendelMonteiro
pushed a commit
to MendelMonteiro/rustlings
that referenced
this issue
Jun 28, 2020
As indicated in rust-lang#259 , I found it confusing to have 2 comments as the code wouldn't compile unless I solved both issues (I used the script from rust-lang#281 to remove a comment and use `:wn` to go to next exercise, hence this tripped me).
Great idea! And thanks for the script. But I guess my version of rg is out-of-date, since I got Here's my version, which works with
Next, I'd like to see a solution that, when appropriate, opens the latest |
ppp3
pushed a commit
to ppp3/rustlings
that referenced
this issue
May 23, 2022
As indicated in rust-lang#259 , I found it confusing to have 2 comments as the code wouldn't compile unless I solved both issues (I used the script from rust-lang#281 to remove a comment and use `:wn` to go to next exercise, hence this tripped me).
dmoore04
pushed a commit
to dmoore04/rustlings
that referenced
this issue
Sep 11, 2022
As indicated in rust-lang#259 , I found it confusing to have 2 comments as the code wouldn't compile unless I solved both issues (I used the script from rust-lang#281 to remove a comment and use `:wn` to go to next exercise, hence this tripped me).
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
First of all, thank you so much for rustlings, this is an amazing project! A well thought-out practice test suite is worth a thousand tutorials.
I got lazy from having to close nvim and open it on the next file to keep up with
rustlings watch
, so I came up with a little kludge:This is the same as typing:
When you do this, nvim opens one file at a time, and you can navigate between them with
:previous
and:next
.So after passing the tests for one exercise, I delete the
// I AM NOT DONE
line, then type:wn
on nvim, which saves the file (w
is for "write") and opens the next one (n
).That's enough keystroke savings for me, but if this sounds like an interesting idea, maybe it could be turned into a
rustlings watch editor
command that calls$EDITOR
in succession with the file that's currently failingrustlings watch
, so both can be kept running side by side in sync.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: