19 juni 2022 kl. 17.22 skrev Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>:

> No, it's consistent -- it always creates a new line.

Either behaviour can be seen as consistent. I suppose it's a matter of what behaviour we find more convenient.
It's expected to be a rare case and I have no strong opinion about it.

> It's edgy compared to what it's supposed to be doing -- duplicating
> lines.

Well, now it does more. Do you mean that you prefer it wouldn't, or that we change the name?
I have no strong opinion about the name but it would be a shame to make the command less useful.

Here is an updated patch that fixes a bug in the original code (would crash when called without an argument) and adds tests.