Re: bracketed paste - chopping trailing newlines

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 10,  7:11pm, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
}
} Yes, I also feel I'm repeating myself.  I've already made my case a few
} times.  I've also suggested fixes and implemented them.  I have been
} trying to reach consensus, but so far haven't succeeded.  As you can
} imagine, by now I'm rather frustrated.

This may be a situation where it's not possible to get consensus.  We
have I think three different approaches (Oliver's, Carsten's, yours)
none of the three agrees with either of the others, and we haven't
tried conducting any sort of poll.

} 1. Don't strip newlines at paste
} 2. Highlight pastes
} 3. Strip newlines at accept-line that immediately follows a paste
} 
} I think all objections to (2) have been addressed, apart from the
} question of whether to use standout or underline.  I think standout is
} easier to spot and doesn't clash with zle_highlight[region]'s default

I'm of two minds here.  One, there is a relationship between paste and
the region -- if the region is active, the paste replaces it.  However,
if there is no active region, the paste does not make it active (even
though it sets MARK/CURSOR to the opposite ends and e.g. kill-region
will kill the pasted text).  So two, making the paste look the same as
an active region may be misleading ... or, maybe it's OK because it's
almost the same thing.

I guess I agree with Oliver about the newline stripping.