From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22638 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2016 03:16:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 39970 Received: (qmail 10066 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2016 03:16:35 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from mail-yw0-f171.google.com by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from , uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 (clamdscan: 0.99.2/21882. spamassassin: 3.4.1. Clear:RC:0(209.85.161.171):SA:0(-0.0/5.0):. Processed in 0.962481 secs); 18 Nov 2016 03:16:35 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Envelope-From: schaefer@brasslantern.com X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at _netblocks.google.com designates 209.85.161.171 as permitted sender) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=brasslantern-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:date:in-reply-to:comments:references:to:subject :mime-version; bh=gEjDVvSKKZP3m5o+ZMhbSnbLtCHesM8FM0vexDRmfkE=; b=JDd1JB/eBmbaN/YX/bA+b7QK4NwhKruY8yczWwMfV8mBjcVScP7AZRTzT4vlnR38yO 0b42YBrXCjfqbm3ODqWx2pYNcNfTe+464S6Omsb9mmeawOvELrWaNbPIXTtmNvwRUffm q+B0OPxH1cHi8mrMmY35E8+lEgB4U4jAzMkUyVTTYolMZ4EkNknBnqqGatjvch8oQ7YT vXkwaOrmkfzojJN41dQgNqeMq7WnofjV4dYzon7zQBrPP+dskkCohb2FkOf9yMCg/oHS Se39SXKS/VwbQULANxl+s5bkHaPjEaHye/fdpK9lxuEbJ3aJ10/GfZXzN4+pSCN//GDS euKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:date:in-reply-to:comments :references:to:subject:mime-version; bh=gEjDVvSKKZP3m5o+ZMhbSnbLtCHesM8FM0vexDRmfkE=; b=QBIRwap1EOGKmnDzUvQ9C3cYDPF4x0LCK5Gk+tzsPCm2Lh1FVmsrkyk4nMhgdBbJVz MEmLFneWjimny7WmyvLiXZvKDobTrn922lOunVEM+t9YQ3BqR1QFhSg8grunBYrmsAqw pP2FpyfGDkcDrLQkidFuBHtkRMHuNqTQkeniUS4nN50JPVubTZBi4N2wctPhEJjs3S9l CrMKf4LXLWOHn9Un/OuIO9kTQOw+Apz/IOnc7H9zsrqRjtQlQ+1NgoXf7LPKBbubp8DG jIBAKHT+97Glbyjd+gRoVLvYJUJCgdJVy1ReDW0u4gfUBmRKCt/8aSWEm4wVkbBY5mrX /iBw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC01YWxjlpgvd3Cnd0oBp6rl0+ZVc3D0Xm1thSRtynD4T8GUCkpXPUULObgXm8OZEFg== X-Received: by 10.129.75.2 with SMTP id y2mr6374908ywa.120.1479438987440; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 19:16:27 -0800 (PST) From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <161117191641.ZM7944@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 19:16:41 -0800 In-Reply-To: <92342.1479401635@hydra.kiddle.eu> Comments: In reply to Oliver Kiddle "Re: Shift-Insert overwrites ZLE CUTBUFFER" (Nov 17, 5:53pm) References: <161025091249.ZM7232@torch.brasslantern.com> <161026090133.ZM11120@torch.brasslantern.com> <161026165138.ZM12130@torch.brasslantern.com> <87h97x36sa.fsf@lwm.klanderman.net> <161027133523.ZM15655@torch.brasslantern.com> <43312.1477929414@hydra.kiddle.eu> <20161031161605.23af1751@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <161109092745.ZM2477@torch.brasslantern.com> <4446.1478794906@hydra.kiddle.eu> <161110091736.ZM20932@torch.brasslantern.com> <22835.1479246117@hydra.kiddle.eu> <161115140723.ZM11274@torch.brasslantern.com> <92342.1479401635@hydra.kiddle.eu> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: Shift-Insert overwrites ZLE CUTBUFFER MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Nov 17, 5:53pm, Oliver Kiddle wrote: } Subject: Re: Shift-Insert overwrites ZLE CUTBUFFER } } On 10 Nov, Bart wrote: } > emacs. So yes, emacs does have a whole suite of register operations, } > none of which are present in zsh (which in fairness was based on a } } Would it be useful to add some of those operations given that it } might share much of the existing code that's there for vi (given a } few compromises)? It'd probably suffice to create widget aliases giving the existing vi widgets the corresponding emacs names, except special cases that you have already noted. } Coming back to the original point of this thread, would it make } sense to instead put the bracketed-paste text in a register? I don't have a strong opinion here. As noted, if this were a real GUI-aware emacs, the act of *copying* the text would have set the cutbuffer, so it makes sense to me to put it there on the paste action (the first real chance we have to sync up with the global clipboard state). It's more that people aren't used to having a copy-paste affect their shell that way that is causing an issue, than the logic of the operation (I think, someone will probably contradict me). I'm not going to respond in detail to your musings about emacs register operations; my only thought is that we're supposed to be maintaining a shell here, not re-implementing several editors.