From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3212 invoked from network); 11 Apr 2000 09:20:34 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 11 Apr 2000 09:20:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 18983 invoked by alias); 11 Apr 2000 09:20:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 10640 Received: (qmail 18966 invoked from network); 11 Apr 2000 09:20:10 -0000 Message-ID: <38F2EE43.D9C0B23C@u.genie.co.uk> Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 10:20:03 +0100 From: Oliver Kiddle X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: copy-prev-word question RE: Bug report interface comments References: <200004100758.JAA31384@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> <1000411025209.ZM31402@candle.brasslantern.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bart Schaefer wrote: > > On Apr 10, 9:58am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote: > } -Duplicate the word behind the cursor. > } +Duplicate the word before the cursor. > So "behind the cursor" is to the left of it (unless you're writing in > Hebrew or Aramaic or something) and I think the doc was correct before, > or rather it was correct "behind." I'm sure what you say is right but 'before' seems clearer to me. Would it maybe be clearer if the doc said 'Duplicate the word to the left of the cursor'. I wouldn't particularly consider the left to be behind the right because it is no further away and isn't obscured by it. I agree with Andrej in finding 'before the cursor' more understandable. Oliver