[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

apparent inconsistencies in readline documentation

From: Daniel Molina
Subject: apparent inconsistencies in readline documentation
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 18:21:14 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0


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

2. Default key sequences vs. emacs key bindings [the default].

It is confusing to me that there are two defaults. Firstly, it can be read:

           The  following  is  a list of the names of the commands and
    the default
           key sequences to which they are bound.  Command names without
    an accom‐
           panying key sequence are unbound by default.

On the other hand, emacs editing command are default:

    readline  offers  editing  capabilities  while the user is entering the
           line.  By default, the line editing commands are similar  to 
    those  of
           emacs.  A vi-style line editing interface is also available.

An explicit list of emacs commands is maintained and commands do not
always coincide (both being valid defaults in practice). For example,
instead of C-x Rubout for backward-kill-line, emacs has

             "C-XC-?"  backward-kill-line

3. Key-bindings in the emacs/vi list are written with capital letters
(C-A), but not in the section with the description (C-a).

Best regards,


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]