by Hellow Editors! ( I mean the people who do editing not the programs :-),
>Here are my stty all keys:
>erase kill werase rprnt flush lnext susp intr quit stop eof
>^H ^U ^W ^R ^O ^V ^Z/^Y ^C ^\ ^S/^Q ^D
>
>I expect these to work the same in my editor unless and until I should
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>rebind them. Is this or is this not the case? Last time I touched
>emacs it was not.
>
>That means ^H should be backward-delete-char, (not help!!!), ^Z should
>be suspend, ^W should be backward-delete-word, ^U should kill the whole
>line, ^C should be interrupt, etc. I've the same complaint with tcsh.
>
>--tom
I am tempted to post my own ideas that may fit in this thread.
I have been thinknig for quite some time that how willl it
be if you replace standard shell in Unix with some version of
Emacs? There are many reasons for this.
1. Shells are becoming more like programing language
environments day by day
(they started with shell variables, then sombody added
line ditor for command line editing, and now people are
saying one can define functions etc in shell.)
2. Editors are giving more and more features to do things which
you normally do outside (I mean in a shell).
So why cannot we merge these two and make an Editing Shell?
One can, for example, take Emacs to the extream and give all the
facilities that one want to do with a shell. You have
Emacs LISP instead of shell language. But whether one wants to do
it using LISP or not is different issue. I only gave an example.
Once we merge Shell and Editor, the problems of incompatibility
between STTY SETTINGS and KEY BINDINGS in Editor go away
naturally.
But ofcourse we have to change a lot for any exiting editor
(even Emacs) to make the user as comfortable with editor
as he is with a shell.
Opinions are most wellcome
--
___________________________________________________________________________
National Centre for Software Technology, Phone : +91 (22) 620 1606
Gulmohar Cross Rd No. 9, Telex : 011-78260 NCST IN