4:13 a.m.
This comes from SXEmacs so I'm not going to commit without another
Reviewer's go ahead.
Also, the key bindings here... they were the first ones that came to
me, I have no attachment to them so if you can think of better ones,
cool.:-)
21.5 patch:
ChangeLog files diff command: cvs -q diff -U 0
Files affected: lisp/ChangeLog
Source files diff command: cvs -q diff -uN
Files affected: lisp/simple.el lisp/keydefs.el
Index: lisp/ChangeLog
===================================================================
RCS file: /pack/xemacscvs/XEmacs/xemacs/lisp/ChangeLog,v
retrieving revision 1.653
diff -u -p -U0 -r1.653 ChangeLog
--- lisp/ChangeLog 17 Mar 2005 09:26:07 -0000 1.653
+++ lisp/ChangeLog 23 Mar 2005 04:04:11 -0000
＠＠ -0,0 +1,12 ＠＠
+2005-03-23 Steve Youngs <steve(a)sxemacs.org>
+
+ From Johann Oskarsson <johann(a)myrkraverk.com>
+
+ * simple.el (delete-word): New.
+ (backward-delete-word): New.
+ Delete words without messing with the kill-ring.
+
+ * keydefs.el: Keybindings for above...
+ `M-D' -- `delete-word'
+ `C-BS' -- `backward-delete-word'
+
Index: lisp/keydefs.el
===================================================================
RCS file: /pack/xemacscvs/XEmacs/xemacs/lisp/keydefs.el,v
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -p -u -r1.18 keydefs.el
--- lisp/keydefs.el 28 Apr 2003 16:18:23 -0000 1.18
+++ lisp/keydefs.el 23 Mar 2005 04:02:53 -0000
＠＠ -299,6 +299,7 ＠＠ Keymap for characters following C-c.")
(define-key global-map "\M-f" 'forward-word)
(define-key global-map "\M-b" 'backward-word)
(define-key global-map "\M-d" 'kill-word)
+(define-key global-map "\M-D" 'delete-word)
(define-key global-map "\M-<" 'beginning-of-buffer)
(define-key global-map "\M->" 'end-of-buffer)
＠＠ -405,6 +406,7 ＠＠ Keymap for characters following C-c.")
;; Default binding of "Control-h" is help.
(define-key global-map 'backspace 'delete-backward-char)
(define-key global-map '(meta backspace) 'backward-kill-word)
+(define-key global-map '(control backspace) 'backward-delete-word)
(define-key global-map [(control x) backspace] 'backward-kill-sentence)
(define-key global-map "\M-\C-z" 'activate-region)
Index: lisp/simple.el
===================================================================
RCS file: /pack/xemacscvs/XEmacs/xemacs/lisp/simple.el,v
retrieving revision 1.50
diff -u -p -u -r1.50 simple.el
--- lisp/simple.el 23 Feb 2005 22:25:16 -0000 1.50
+++ lisp/simple.el 23 Mar 2005 04:02:55 -0000
＠＠ -2745,6 +2745,19 ＠＠ With argument, do this that many times."
(interactive "*p")
(kill-word (- (or count 1))))
+(defun delete-word (&optional count)
+ "Delete characters forward until encountering the end of a word.
+With optional argument COUNT, do this that many times."
+ (interactive "*p")
+ (delete-region (point) (save-excursion (forward-word count) (point))))
+
+(defun backward-delete-word (&optional count)
+ "Delete characters backward until encountering the end of a word.
+With argument, do this that many times."
+ (interactive "*p")
+ (delete-word (- (or count 1))))
+
+
(defun current-word (&optional strict)
"Return the word point is on (or a nearby word) as a string.
If optional arg STRICT is non-nil, return nil unless point is within
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| I am Dyslexic of Borg. |
| Fusistance is retile. Your arse will be laminated. |
|------------------------------------<steve(a)sxemacs.org>---|
12:52 p.m.
Steve Youngs <steve(a)sxemacs.org> writes:
This comes from SXEmacs so I'm not going to commit without
another
Reviewer's go ahead.
I don't see the point of this. In the rare cases where deleting
without touching the kill-ring is needed, one can use the movement
commands along with "delete-region".
Is there a usage pattern for these patterns that I'm missing?
Also, the key bindings here... they were the first ones that came to
me, I have no attachment to them so if you can think of better ones,
cool.:-)
I disagree with binding these to a key by default.
3:38 a.m.
* Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Steve Youngs <steve(a)sxemacs.org> writes:
> This comes from SXEmacs so I'm not going to commit without another
> Reviewer's go ahead.
I don't see the point of this. In the rare cases where deleting
without touching the kill-ring is needed, one can use the movement
commands along with "delete-region".
What you might consider rare, somebody else might consider common.
I'm sure there are things you do every day in XEmacs that are very
common for you that many people have never used once.
Is there a usage pattern for these patterns that I'm missing?
I dunno, I've used it 3 or 4 times writing this email. :-)
> Also, the key bindings here... they were the first ones that came
to
> me, I have no attachment to them so if you can think of better ones,
> cool.:-)
I disagree with binding these to a key by default.
I won't object to your objection, I don't understand it, but I won't
object to it. :-)
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| I am Dyslexic of Borg. |
| Fusistance is retile. Your arse will be laminated. |
|------------------------------------<steve(a)sxemacs.org>---|
11:40 a.m.
Steve Youngs <steve(a)sxemacs.org> writes:
> I don't see the point of this. In the rare cases where
deleting
> without touching the kill-ring is needed, one can use the
> movement commands along with "delete-region".
What you might consider rare, somebody else might consider common.
Sure, but what is the reason for deleting words without killing them?
Do the killed words corrupt the state of your kill-ring? (I'm
guessing here.) I've never encountered a problem with kill-word, so I
have to ask.
I'm objecting because we might as well introduce functions for
deleting a line without killing it, deleting a sexp without killing
it, etc. It would be -- if you excuse the bad pun -- overkill.
> Is there a usage pattern for these patterns that I'm
missing?
I dunno, I've used it 3 or 4 times writing this email. :-)
Why not just use M-backspace and M-d instead?
2:13 a.m.
* Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Steve Youngs <steve(a)sxemacs.org> writes:
> > I don't see the point of this. In the rare cases where deleting
> > without touching the kill-ring is needed, one can use the
> > movement commands along with "delete-region".
>
> What you might consider rare, somebody else might consider common.
Sure, but what is the reason for deleting words without killing
them?
Do the killed words corrupt the state of your kill-ring? (I'm
guessing here.) I've never encountered a problem with kill-word, so I
have to ask.
No there isn't any corruption or anything like that going on. It's
simply a way to avoid things going into the kill-ring if you don't
want them to.
But I suppose that you can cycle through elements of the kill-ring
anyway.
I'm objecting because we might as well introduce functions for
deleting a line without killing it, deleting a sexp without killing
it, etc. It would be -- if you excuse the bad pun -- overkill.
Bugger. I think I'm finding myself agreeing with you.
> > Is there a usage pattern for these patterns that I'm
missing?
>
> I dunno, I've used it 3 or 4 times writing this email. :-)
Why not just use M-backspace and M-d instead?
Um, because they _kill_ the word thus add to the kill-ring. The
whole purpose behind `delete-word' is that the deleted word _doesn't_
end up in the kill-ring.
I'm not going to push this any further, I no longer think it is such a
crash hot idea.
Thanks Hrvoje!
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| I am Dyslexic of Borg. |
| Fusistance is retile. Your arse will be laminated. |
|------------------------------------<steve(a)sxemacs.org>---|
4:52 a.m.
>>>> "SY" == Steve Youngs
<steve(a)sxemacs.org> writes:
SY> The whole purpose behind `delete-word' is that the deleted
SY> word _doesn't_ end up in the kill-ring.
I don't think these should be bound to keys by default, but they might
be a useful component of a CUA mode.
--
School of Systems and Information Engineering http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.
7252
days inactive
7255
days old
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Hrvoje Niksic -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Steve Youngs