Re: line editor command history behavior

2001-12-09 Thread Cliff Sarginson
On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 05:46:41PM +1100, Doug Kearns wrote: > On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 09:06:42AM +0100, Cliff Sarginson wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:20:03PM +1100, Doug Kearns wrote: > > > I've just noticed that if you are cycling through the command history > > > and abort with a ^G, th

Re: line editor command history behavior

2001-12-08 Thread Doug Kearns
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 09:06:42AM +0100, Cliff Sarginson wrote: > On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:20:03PM +1100, Doug Kearns wrote: > > I've just noticed that if you are cycling through the command history > > and abort with a ^G, the next time you invoke the line editor you are > > placed at the poin

Re: line editor command history behavior

2001-12-04 Thread Cliff Sarginson
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:20:03PM +1100, Doug Kearns wrote: > I've just noticed that if you are cycling through the command history > and abort with a ^G, the next time you invoke the line editor you are > placed at the point in history list at which you aborted. > > example: > > :command 1 > :

line editor command history behavior

2001-12-03 Thread Doug Kearns
I've just noticed that if you are cycling through the command history and abort with a ^G, the next time you invoke the line editor you are placed at the point in history list at which you aborted. example: :command 1 :command 2 :command 3 :command 4 :command 5 cycle up the history to 'command