[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: No copy when killing

From: rock69
Subject: Re: No copy when killing
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 03:18:34 -0700 (PDT)
User-agent: G2/1.0

On Jun 14, 11:54 am, Xah <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2:24 am, rock69 <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Is there some way to disable copying to the clipboard when deleting
> > something (ex. with M-d or C-k)? I'm asking this because I often find
> > myself copying something and then deleting successive lines, and when
> > I have to paste what I had previously copied, it's really annoying to
> > have to scroll through with C-y M-y.
> i doubt there's a buildin customization to let you set that pref.
> You might need to write your own function to do delete text without
> putting things in ring. (the elisp would be trivial... pls ask if you
> want the code)
> -------------------------
> however, what you want is prob best done by using emacs's so-called
> “register”, which basically allow you to have multiple clipborads.
> select a region, then do M-x copy-to-register (C-x r x). Then type 1
> (as the name of your register)
> To paste that, type M-x insert-register (C-x r g), then type 1.
> You can of course bind these to shortcuts with a simple elisp, so
> that, for example, M-1 copy region to clipboard 1, M-S-1 paste it from
> clipboard 1. Similar for 2, 3, etc.
> -------------------------
> ... i've been thinking whether emacs behavior of M-d, C-k etc
> automatically put things into kill-ring is a efficient mode of
> operation, as opposed to not have these operations auto put into kill-
> ring and only copy/cut (M-w,C-w) does. But just never spent the time
> to seriously think about this.
> I'm used to the emacs way anyhow for 10 years and didn't find any prob
> with it. However, this doesn't imply this emacs way is more
> efficient... just habit. (of course, emacs old timers are likely to
> say it's that way because decades of hacker usage find it to be
> efficient and blab blab... which often has no scientific basis
> whatsoever and in fact some of emacs ways, such as its default
> keybindings and its undo behavior, are very operatively inefficient.)
>   Xah

Thank you Xah for the detailed explanation. I would indeed like to see
the code if it's not too much trouble. Although, as a matter of fact,
I most likely am going to follow your suggestion, and use another
register when I'm in one of the situations I mentioned.

Thanks again so much :)

reply via email to

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