Path: csiph.com!xmission!news.snarked.org!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!panix!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail
From: Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu>
Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug
Subject: Re: apparent inconsistencies in readline documentation
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 10:11:21 -0400
Organization: ITS, Case Western Reserve University
Lines: 74
Approved: bug-bash@gnu.org
Message-ID: <mailman.204.1595945498.2739.bug-bash@gnu.org>
References: <74580fd0-3f5c-6aab-ec65-815ec18d6781@autistici.org> <c39f3267-e91f-0e20-1478-2f75bef00361@case.edu> <e40e660c-c7b0-3c4c-fca6-ecc3f8c2ba06@autistici.org> <835d3ebe-51e1-0986-3395-3ae71bc16313@case.edu>
Reply-To: chet.ramey@case.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: lists.gnu.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: chet.ramey@case.edu
To: Daniel Molina <lluvia@autistici.org>, bug-bash@gnu.org
Envelope-to: bug-bash@gnu.org
Autocrypt: addr=chet.ramey@case.edu; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQGiBEEOsGwRBACFa0A1oa71HSZLWxAx0svXzhOZNQZOzqHmSuGOG92jIpQpr8DpvgRh40Yp AwdcXb8QG1J5yGAKeevNE1zCFaA725vGSdHUyypHouV0xoWwukYO6qlyyX+2BZU+okBUqoWQ koWxiYaCSfzB2Ln7pmdys1fJhcgBKf3VjWCjd2XJTwCgoFJOwyBFJdugjfwjSoRSwDOIMf0D /iQKqlWhIO1LGpMrGX0il0/x4zj0NAcSwAk7LaPZbN4UPjn5pqGEHBlf1+xDDQCkAoZ/VqES GZragl4VqJfxBr29Ag0UDvNbUbXoxQsARdero1M8GiAIRc50hj7HXFoERwenbNDJL86GPLAQ OTGOCa4W2o29nFfFjQrsrrYHzVtyA/9oyKvTeEMJ7NA3VJdWcmn7gOu0FxEmSNhSoV1T4vP2 1Wf7f5niCCRKQLNyUy0wEApQi4tSysdz+AbgAc0b/bHYVzIf2uO2lIEZQNNt+3g2bmXgloWm W5fsm/di50Gm1l1Na63d3RZ00SeFQos6WEwLUHEB0yp6KXluXLLIZitEJLQwQ2hldCBSYW1l eSAoQ2FzZSBzdGFuZGFyZCkgPGNoZXQucmFtZXlAY2FzZS5lZHU+iF8EExECAB8FAkPi19EC GwMHCwkIBwMCAQMVAgMDFgIBAh4BAheAAAoJELtYafBk6nSrelkAn31Gsuib7GcCZHbv5L5t VKYR9LklAJ4hzUHKA49Z0QXR+qCb80osIcmPSbkBDQRBDrBvEAQAkK6TAOKBEM+EC4j6V/7o /riVZqcgU5cid2qG9TXdwNtD9a3kvA/ObZBO93sX59wc6Bnwo4VJxsOmMlpGrAjJsxNwg3QH akEtf8LXRbVpj5xStdmBdQZUhIQyalo/2/TZq5OijtddUQcL5cs70hTv/FpT3wUvr2Xr8rjF 41IFEz8AAwcD/A0CZEGlzIrT5WCBnl6xBog/8vKiUCbarByat3d1mL6DbizvKNXQRTC9E/vE dENAWCQCjr75Bu55xT8n3SXGtWdDC5xmZ/P3OBYORP8yl8H8I1FIosWOFirbIeYdZPq8SPD1 HL+EXo9zSiHVrrZRJ19ooCKKbSdXHFCY+aJG+0KZiEkEGBECAAkFAkEOsG8CGwwACgkQu1hp 8GTqdKvjcACfZlkVCDwaz/NTO9cy3t69oWpVPNwAnRwe0qk/WL/gfhH346xh5B3HFbFN
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
In-Reply-To: <e40e660c-c7b0-3c4c-fca6-ecc3f8c2ba06@autistici.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=129.22.103.226; envelope-from=chet.ramey@case.edu; helo=mpv1-2015.case.edu
X-Spam_score_int: -43
X-Spam_score: -4.4
X-Spam_bar: ----
X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-BeenThere: bug-bash@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell <bug-bash.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-bash@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID: <835d3ebe-51e1-0986-3395-3ae71bc16313@case.edu>
X-Mailman-Original-References: <74580fd0-3f5c-6aab-ec65-815ec18d6781@autistici.org> <c39f3267-e91f-0e20-1478-2f75bef00361@case.edu> <e40e660c-c7b0-3c4c-fca6-ecc3f8c2ba06@autistici.org>
Xref: csiph.com gnu.bash.bug:16637

On 7/28/20 4:21 AM, Daniel Molina wrote:
> On 27/7/20 22:09, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> On 7/25/20 12:21 PM, Daniel Molina wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I found some aspects of readline documentation that seem inconsistent to
>>> me and I wanted to share them.
>>>
>>> 1. The difference between backward-kill-line and unix-line-discard
>>> readline commands.
>>>
>>> Documentation states:
>>>
>>>        backward-kill-line (C-x Rubout)
>>>               Kill backward to the beginning of the line.
>>>
>>>        unix-line-discard (C-u)
>>>               Kill backward from point to the  beginning  of  the 
>>> line.   The
>>>               killed text is saved on the kill-ring.
>>>
>>> In both cases they kill from the point and killed text is saved in the
>>> kill-ring.
>> The difference is what happens with numeric arguments.
> 
> 
> I see.
> 
> 
>>  Maybe that is what
>> should be added to the backward-kill-line description.
> 
> I think that would be useful for that an similar commands. I found the
> question asked on the web too.

There is already

"If you pass a negative argument to a
command which normally acts in a forward direction, that command will
act in a backward direction.  For example, to kill text back to the
start of the line, you might type @samp{M-- C-k}."

It seems like one statement is better than adding the same text to
multiple command descriptions.



> Maybe a confusing part is Section "1.3.3 Sample Init File" of
> doc/readline.info where there are lines like
> 
>          # Arrow keys in keypad mode
>          #
>          #"\M-OD":        backward-char
> 
> 
>          #
>          # Arrow keys in ANSI mode
>          #
>          "\M-[D":        backward-char
> 
> and
> 
>     "\C-xr": redraw-current-line

This is not what we're talking about. These are specific multi-key
sequences that are bound to specific commands, not a question of whether
C-A and C-a are equivalent. The parallel to the previous question would
be whether "\C-Xr" and "\C-xr" are equivalent key sequences.

-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
		 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/