Re: up-line-or-search still 'fixed'!

[Anthony Heading <anthony.j.heading@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 03:08:04PM +0100, Andrew Main wrote:
> Yes.  That's why I'm unwilling to go back to the old behaviour.
> The behaviour of up-line-or-search used to depend on whether the
> immediately preceding editing command was also up-line-or-search.
> The model I'm trying to move ZLE to has the effects of each editing
> command as independent as possible of other commands, so that eventually
> most of them can be separated into modules or even implemented purely
> as shell functions.  Each of the ZLE_* flags violates this principle to
> some extent, so I'm trying to remove them as far as possible (which will
> not be completely).
[...] 
> But for the moment it just doesn't fit into the ZLE architecture.
> 
> How would people feel about making up-line-or-search do a
> history-beginning-search-backwards?  This would be a lot closer to the
> old behaviour, differing only in the resulting cursor position.

OK.  I've done my best to live with this for six weeks.  But it just isn't
working for me.   This was a really major feature for anyone who had it
turned on, and having read the code now, IMHO the hit far outweighed the
benefits of a fractionally less broken architecture:  it was doing no real
harm until it was the last of the residual state variables.

So I really must protest.  This is purism over usability!

Thus unfortunately, I'm going to have to switch back to 3.0.5 until
the brave new dawn.  

-- 
Anthony J.R. Heading    J.P. Morgan & Co. Inc, Singapore
Email: heading_anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxx    Tel: +65 326 9027