From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2282 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2002 18:23:45 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 6 Mar 2002 18:23:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 19410 invoked by alias); 6 Mar 2002 18:23:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 16772 Received: (qmail 19395 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2002 18:23:37 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <1020306182111.ZM23061@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 18:21:11 +0000 In-Reply-To: <21415.1015339730@csr.com> Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson "PATCH: Re: insert-last-word/copy-prev-word/... question" (Mar 5, 2:48pm) References: <21415.1015339730@csr.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: Peter Stephenson , zsh-workers@sunsite.dk (Zsh hackers list) Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: insert-last-word/copy-prev-word/... question MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mar 5, 2:48pm, Peter Stephenson wrote: } } + * If we have two arguments, the second is the position of } + * the word to extract, 1..N. The default is to use the } + * numeric argument, or the last word if that is not set. Doesn't this conflict with what the numeric argument used to mean? I think this whole thing could have been written as a shell widget without resorting to modifying insert-last-word. I just haven't had a lot of time to think about it yet. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net