[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: mark-word
From: |
Andreas Röhler |
Subject: |
Re: mark-word |
Date: |
Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:27:43 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.5 |
Am Mittwoch, 14. November 2007 09:26 schrieb David Kastrup:
> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:
> > Andreas Röhler writes:
> > > If mark-word is called while inside a word, it marks
> > > from this point until the end of word first AFAIS, thus
> > > leaving the first part of the word unmarked.
> > >
> > > IMO marking the word-at-point completely then would be
> > > a more convenient behaviour.
> >
> > `mark-word' itself should remain compatible with `kill-word' and
> > `mark-sexp'. I think it would be a good idea to have a
> > `mark-entire-word' command and bind it to M-@, especially since C-@
> > doesn't mark a character. Ditto `mark-entire-sexp' and address@hidden
>
> Since "mark whole ..." for both directions is useful for more than
> words, I think it would be more useful to have a prefix for that.
>
> C-u C-u feels natural for "both directions", but to make it
> non-surprising, one would likely have to assign separate meaning to C-u
> (as opposed to C-u 4). So probably rather C-u address@hidden
What about this?
(defun mark-word-at-point ()
" "
(interactive)
(beginning-of-thing 'word)
(push-mark nil nil t)
(end-of-thing 'word))
Andreas Röhler
- mark-word, Andreas Röhler, 2007/11/14
- mark-word, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2007/11/14
- Re: mark-word, Leo, 2007/11/14
- Re: mark-word, David Kastrup, 2007/11/14
- Re: mark-word,
Andreas Röhler <=
- Re: mark-word, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2007/11/14
- Re: mark-word, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/11/14
- Re: mark-word, Miles Bader, 2007/11/14
- Re: mark-word, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/11/15
- Re: mark-word, Miles Bader, 2007/11/15
- Re: mark-word, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/11/15
- Re: mark-word, Andreas Röhler, 2007/11/15
- Re: mark-word, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2007/11/14