Re: [Nano-devel] RFC: should cutword overwrite the cutbuffer?

[Benno Schulenberg]

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016, at 11:18, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 04 Jan 2016 10:35, Benno Schulenberg wrote:
> > [...] the functions are not entirely the same: readline's
> > forward-word goes to the first whitespace after a word, nano's
> > nextword goes to the first character of the subsequent word.
> > If those functions would be named the same...
> 
> imo we should be trying to converge on readline behavior in all aspects
> rather than creating a completely unique/different experience.

Well, the nextword behaviour is what pico does, so nano does the same.
And vim and Minimum Profit, for example, behave the same way in this
respect, so it's not unique.

Benno

-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - IMAP accessible web-mail