- want to try new changes i've made to switchboard onlineaccounts (segmentation fault)
- Can't intsall 'top' system
- Is the right to engage in scientific inquiry a fundamental right?
- Составление предложений с “обратными” действиями
- What song had a music video that started with a car falling from the sky?
- Linear turntables - more damaging than a standard turntable?
- Civil Engineering
- Contours of radial-flow impeller vane
- Is there an ideal propeller shape?
- Doxygen support
- Magit status is slow on Linux but fast on MacOS
- hl-line face used as default in 26.1
- How long would it take for an Earth-like planet to flood?
- How do I explain the traits of my warrior-culture aliens?
- How can a person be kept alive while being periodically drained of blood?
- CraftCMS 2->3 Migration error: syntax error, unexpected 'const' (T_CONST), expecting variable (T_VARIABLE)
- A Quick Sudoklu
- A Heroic Riley Riddle (Risen)
- How to decide optimal threshold for my classification model from FPR, TPR and threshold
- What does Negative Log Likelihood mean?
Why does “E89: No write since last change” error not occur when commands are joined with bar?
I have :set hidden set in my ~/.vimrc.
First I did this:
vim foo bar
The :bd# command leads to this error:
E89: No write since last change for buffer 2 (add ! to override)
This is expected behavior.
Then I did this:
vim foo bar
:bp | bd#Enter
This time :bp | bd#Enter did not lead to any error. The output of :lsEnter shows that the buffer for bar is still present.
Why did the E89 error did not occur in the second set of steps?