rbj@dsys.ncsl.nist.GOV (Root Boy Jim) (08/03/89)
? From: boris@prodigal.psych.rochester.edu (Boris Goldowsky) ? But we already have syntax tables which specify which characters are ? part of words. Couldn't this behavior be more easily gotten with ? modify-syntax-entry? I don't think so. Emacs and vi both agree (more or less) on what makes up a word. They disagree on what it means to move past one. The behavior going backwards is the same, but not forwards. Emacs' forward is somewhere between vi's `e' and `w' commands. This used to drive me mad when I first learned emacs, but I got used to it tho. I don't know if emacs' definition is based on sound theoretical premise or merely on whim. ? Bng Root Boy Jim Have GNU, Will Travel.
sdk@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Scott D Kalter) (08/09/89)
I'm not sure what you would consider a "sound theoretical basis" for this particular item. However, let me suggest the following... In the emacs manual for Tops-20 Emacs written by RMS he states that the cursor should be thought of as a thin vertical bar to the left of the character it is currently on (somewhat like a WYSIWYG editor cursor). Given this way of thinking about it then the forward-word and backward-word functions both work fairly intuitively (at least for my intuition). Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse. -sdk