Re: Zap-to-char behaviour

[Luc Teirlinck]

Ehud Karni wrote:

   If you want a consistent function I propose the following:

Your function seems indeed to be an improvement.

   My personal opinion is that `zap-to-char' is good enough for me and
   I don't need this one,

I do not personally see the need for zap-up-to-char either, because it
is so easy to retype the character that M-z already prompted for.
However, if your usage is such that you know that you *never* will
want to erase the character, then rebinding M-z to zap-up-to-char
might be useful.

Sincerely,

Luc.