Re: [Nano-devel] [Request] allow deleting a marked region without affecting the cutbuffer

[Brand Huntsman]

On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 18:02:11 +0200
Benno Schulenberg <address@hidden> wrote:

> That nano should use the desktop's clipboard instead of its own
> private cutbuffer?

No, don't do this!

I use X11's clipboard to hold text because nano overwrites the cutbuffer when I 
cut a line. It would be okay if nano had a second cut function that didn't 
write to cutbuffer, and should be easy to add it as a flag in the existing cut 
function. But the external clipboard can also be used as a secondary clipboard, 
and having nano use it would eliminate this feature.


> But <Bsp> and <Del> affecting regions is a behavior change, and would
> most likely have to be parked behind an option.

Having Bsp/Del cut selected text is logical and most people expect it since 
everything else works that way. And word cutting doesn't overwrite cutbuffer, 
so Bsp/Del shouldn't either. If text is marked, Bsp/Del could call the second 
cut function mentioned above and not perform their normal behavior.

But having a second cut function (and key) would be far more useful than having 
Bsp/Del cut selected text, since the second cut function could also cut 
unmarked lines and be used in alternate cuttoend/cuttostart macros that 
wouldn't overwrite cutbuffer. Making Bsp/Del use it could be optional, but I 
don't see why, you can undo mistakes. And who actually uses Bsp/Del while text 
is marked?

The problem is that if Bsp/Del do this, then so should the copy function and 
character keys. If text is marked, they could call the second cut function and 
then perform their normal behavior. If that is too complicated to do, then 
Bsp/Del shouldn't do it either, for consistency. But the second cut 
function/key should be added. :)

Also, why does Bsp unmark shift selections but Del doesn't?