From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16983 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 00:27:42 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (HELO sunsite.auc.dk) (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 00:27:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 28458 invoked by alias); 18 Dec 2000 00:27:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 13290 Received: (qmail 28451 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 00:27:37 -0000 Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: vicmd bindings In-Reply-To: <20001216112057.C14538@dman.com> from Clint Adams at "Dec 16, 2000 11:20:57 am" To: Clint Adams Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 00:27:35 +0000 (GMT) CC: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Zefram Clint Adams wrote: >> Any reason that >> >> "j" down-line-or-history >> "k" up-line-or-history >> >> aren't vi-down-line-or-history &al. by default? The names are misleading: the vi- versions do something quite different from the unprefixed versions, it's not just a question of vi and Emacs doing something differently. You'll notice that vi-{up,down}-line-or-history are bound to "-" and "+" by default -- vi has both types of line movement. (The difference is that the "-"/"+" versions -- the "vi-"-prefixed widgets -- move the cursor to the beginning of the target line, rather than leaving it at the same column.) >I'll commit this patch. It should be trivial to reverse should >there actually be a reason for the original behavior. Your patch is wrong and should be reversed. (I have bandwidth issues right now so I can't reverse it myself.) Without the patch, zle accurately imitates vi in this respect. -zefram