From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 20:22:25 -0500 From: Russ Cox To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] tab completion and command history in rc In-Reply-To: <436AB5F5.8050703@moseslake-wa.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <71838305-CDB2-4CE6-87C5-8EFAA3E03FD1@mit.edu> <436AB5F5.8050703@moseslake-wa.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: a4b27d0c-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > 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. See /n/sources/contrib/rsc/scripts/" and /n/sources/contrib/rsc/scripts/"" for scripts that let you more easily find things in the rc window. As for ^F, I use it all the time and am very happy with it. The #plan9 crowd is a bit too much into the religious fanaticism. They complain that ^F doesn't work if rio's name space is different from the window in which ^F is typed. That's true, but it's also true of the plumber and yet the plumber is sacrosanct. There's a lot in Plan 9 that works only because of conventions. It's very powerful when used properly. For example, it's great that I can @{rfork n; import other-machine /proc; ps} but not so great that I can @{rfork n; bind /env /proc; ps} Is that an argument that ps or bind or /proc is a bad idea? No. It's an argument that you have to follow the conventions or things get confused. Russ