Re: [Nano-devel] RFC: should cutword overwrite the cutbuffer?

[Mike Frysinger]

On 03 Jan 2016 21:57, Benno Schulenberg wrote:
> Currently, when using one of the two cutword functions,
> the word (or part of a word) that is deleted, is entered
> into the cutbuffer, overwriting anything that it is there.
> In my opinion this is undesirable -- because pressing either
> backspace of delete several times does not enter anything
> into the cutbuffer nor does it alter its state.
> 
> To see what I mean, put for example 'bind ^D cutwordleft main'
> into your .nanorc, then run 'src/nano +3 NEWS', and type
> ^K ^D ^D ^D ^D, then type ^U.  Instead of the deleted line
> getting pasted back, only the last deleted word is: "as".

i think it's buggy that the cuts do not accumulate.  otherwise,
why does ^K ^K ^K ^U put back three lines ?

> What do you think?  Should cutwordleft and cutwordright
> leave the cutbuffer alone?
> 
>   https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?46780

yes, cut functions should operate on the buffer.  what you're describing
is a "kill" or "delete" function, not a "cut" function.

it would be nice if we had full access to readline bindings using the
same names (`man 3 readline`).  then people could bind to the exact ops
they want like kill-word instead of cutwordright.
-mike

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature