Hi Ben,
Did you test this patch series in emacs editing mode? M-f doesn't behave
as it should, I'd expect it to move the cursor *after* the current word
but it goes back to the last letter. This is inconsistent with the
existing copy-mode implementation (and Emacs, readline, etc).
Thanks,
--
Rom
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 18:32:40 +0100, Romain Francoise wrote:
> Did you test this patch series in emacs editing mode? M-f doesn't behave
> as it should, I'd expect it to move the cursor *after* the current word
> but it goes back to the last letter. This is inconsistent with the
> existing copy-m
Ben Boeckel writes:
> Is M-f the same as 'e' in vi (end of next word)?
Yes, the only difference is where it leaves the cursor.
> I suppose that the same logic that copy mode is now doing to
> differentiate the two could be done there.
Actually the copy mode implementation is wrong too: in vi m