- How would we overcome the sinking problem as sediment builds up around urban areas?
- Why Would an Enemy Army Retreat if they Will Die Anyway
- What is the significance of number 3?
- Who is “Bharat Mata” & why is she having Indian tricolor flag?
- Find entries that use a specific block in their Matrix field?
- Importing data through feed-me plugin, crashing
- It's a long row ahead, boys
- This could be another Riley's Riddle
- A rhyming riddle made by me, is not as good as Riley's can be
- Come to me, I'll give you rest
- What research is this similar to — Deep CNN for generating images by classifying individual pixels — not a GAN
- how to save deep learning model and test it after training?
- Metric and Binary Variable in Cluster Analysis
- what is this round black rock contained in sandstone
- Does founding a company by E-residency (in Estonia) would create a conflict with my Blue Card in Germany?
- Connecting two ESP32/ESP8266 over internet
- Mega2560 master on RS485 bus stops communicating with VFD when I add another RS485 module
- rerun a char Concatenation
- Pointer memory allocation in function
- Run piece of code based on a feature
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?