From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <436B7A8F.5040405@asgaard.homelinux.org> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 16:13:19 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Nils_O=2E_Sel=E5sdal=22?= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] tab completion and command history in rc References: <71838305-CDB2-4CE6-87C5-8EFAA3E03FD1@mit.edu> <436AB5F5.8050703@moseslake-wa.com> In-Reply-To: <436AB5F5.8050703@moseslake-wa.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: a57e86d6-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 John Floren wrote: > > Ouch. You seem to have unconsciously hit on some of the more hot-button > topics for Plan 9 users. Tab completion is partly implemented; hit > "Ctrl-f". However, as a quick foray onto #plan9 will tell you, nobody > seems to believe in tab completion, finding multiple "ls" commands and > copy-pasting to be faster. As for command history, you are expected to > find the previous command in your rc window, edit it, copy it, paste it > to the prompt, and then run it. This is obviously more efficient than > hitting the "up" arrow. Well, if you're just going to execute the same command again, 'up' can be great. More often than not you're going to edit the command slightly, in which case just point and click/mark with the mouse to edit and about 3 mouse clicks to run it can be faster than it sounds - and in many cases faster than various keyboard gymnastics to get to the same point you're going to edit. This is my experience atleast. If you have to poke around pages of output to find the last command, this isn't that great though. So both approaches has their strengths and flaws. Merge them.