[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Fri, 23 May 2003 21:42:03 +0200
Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux)
Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
> Might it be better for kill-region to either not set this-command to
> 'kill-region if the last command was not already a kill command and
> kill-region did not make a new entry on the kill ring, or,
> alternatively, make kill-region add an empty string to the end of the
> kill ring in the described situation, to which subsequent kill
> commands could append or prepend?
> I agree that we should do one or the other. I think the former is
> better, since I don't see much use in putting the empty region in the
> kill ring. As long as we can provide fairly consistent behavior
> while not putting the empty region in the kill ring, let's do so.
How about this?
--- simple.el.~1.604.~ Thu May 22 09:59:08 2003
+++ simple.el Fri May 23 21:40:41 2003
@@ -1913,7 +1913,8 @@
(if (eq last-command 'kill-region)
(kill-append string (< end beg) yank-handler)
(kill-new string nil yank-handler)))
- (setq this-command 'kill-region))
+ (when (or string (eq last-command 'kill-region))
+ (setq this-command 'kill-region)))
;; The code above failed because the buffer, or some of the characters
;; in the region, are read-only.
This line is not blank.