Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[egarrulo]

I know how to define `backward-delete-word`, but if such a basic command 
were deemed useful by power users, it would ship with Emacs by now.

Do Emacs power users prefer to fix a typo by deleting one char at a 
time?  Or is it because they don't mind polluting the kill ring with 
typos?  Anything else?

Thanks.

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

egarrulo <egarrulo@gmail.com> writes:

> I know how to define `backward-delete-word`, but if such a basic
> command were deemed useful by power users, it would ship with Emacs by
> now.

M-DEL (translated from <M-backspace>) runs the command
backward-kill-word (found in global-map), which is an interactive
compiled Lisp function in ‘simple.el’.

It is bound to <C-backspace>, M-DEL.

(backward-kill-word ARG)

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[egarrulo]

On 06/03/16 12:27, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> egarrulo <egarrulo@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I know how to define `backward-delete-word`, but if such a basic
>> command were deemed useful by power users, it would ship with Emacs by
>> now.
>
> M-DEL (translated from <M-backspace>) runs the command
> backward-kill-word (found in global-map), which is an interactive
> compiled Lisp function in ‘simple.el’.
>
> It is bound to <C-backspace>, M-DEL.
>
> (backward-kill-word ARG)
>

I should have been clearer, sorry.  `backward-kill-word` kills.  I 
wonder why there is no corresponding command to delete instead.

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[tomas]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 12:37:24PM +0100, egarrulo wrote:
> On 06/03/16 12:27, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> >egarrulo <egarrulo@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >>I know how to define `backward-delete-word`, but if such a basic
> >>command were deemed useful by power users, it would ship with Emacs by
> >>now.
> >
> >M-DEL (translated from <M-backspace>) runs the command
> >backward-kill-word (found in global-map), which is an interactive
> >compiled Lisp function in ‘simple.el’.
> >
> >It is bound to <C-backspace>, M-DEL.
> >
> >(backward-kill-word ARG)
> >
> 
> I should have been clearer, sorry.  `backward-kill-word` kills.  I
> wonder why there is no corresponding command to delete instead.

Is there any `forward-delete-word'?

- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlbcIsoACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaTfwCeNApBJJTZhBfJjkjpkhBAYQ1f
V3cAniF+AwYjAFjCgcWxpQKeP2p7KzqF
=m5bF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Edward Knyshov]

M-d

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 8:05 PM <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 12:37:24PM +0100, egarrulo wrote:
> > On 06/03/16 12:27, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> > >egarrulo <egarrulo@gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > >>I know how to define `backward-delete-word`, but if such a basic
> > >>command were deemed useful by power users, it would ship with Emacs by
> > >>now.
> > >
> > >M-DEL (translated from <M-backspace>) runs the command
> > >backward-kill-word (found in global-map), which is an interactive
> > >compiled Lisp function in ‘simple.el’.
> > >
> > >It is bound to <C-backspace>, M-DEL.
> > >
> > >(backward-kill-word ARG)
> > >
> >
> > I should have been clearer, sorry.  `backward-kill-word` kills.  I
> > wonder why there is no corresponding command to delete instead.
>
> Is there any `forward-delete-word'?
>
> - -- t
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlbcIsoACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaTfwCeNApBJJTZhBfJjkjpkhBAYQ1f
> V3cAniF+AwYjAFjCgcWxpQKeP2p7KzqF
> =m5bF
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Marcin Borkowski]

On 2016-03-06, at 14:12, Edward Knyshov <edvorg@gmail.com> wrote:

> M-d

No, it kills, too.

Best,

-- 
Marcin Borkowski
http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
Adam Mickiewicz University

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Stefan Monnier]

> I should have been clearer, sorry.  `backward-kill-word` kills.  I wonder
> why there is no corresponding command to delete instead.

Emacs's UI generally assumes that the difference between "delete" and
"kill" is sufficiently minor that the trouble of providing both versions
is higher than the gain.

IOW, use M-y (or a prefix arg to C-y) to get to the kill you care about.


        Stefan

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Robert Thorpe]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> I should have been clearer, sorry.  `backward-kill-word` kills.  I wonder
>> why there is no corresponding command to delete instead.
>
> Emacs's UI generally assumes that the difference between "delete" and
> "kill" is sufficiently minor that the trouble of providing both versions
> is higher than the gain.
>
> IOW, use M-y (or a prefix arg to C-y) to get to the kill you care about.

As Stefan says, it's not usually necessary.  M-y can skip past
irrelevant kills.  Also, if you know you're going to add something
useless to the kill ring, then you can just use backspace.  Getting rid
of a word with backspace, in the few occasions when it's necessary,
isn't that slow.

But, in keyboard macros it can be troublesome.  If M-y has to be used in
a macro that generally spells trouble.  Also, kills are slower than
deletes.  For those reasons I define delete-word in the obvious way,
like kill-word but using delete-region instead of kill-region.  I don't
bind it to a key though, I just use M-x when I need it, which is only
when using keyboard macros.

BR,
Robert Thorpe

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Eric Abrahamsen]

Robert Thorpe <rt@robertthorpeconsulting.com> writes:

> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>
>>> I should have been clearer, sorry.  `backward-kill-word` kills.  I wonder
>>> why there is no corresponding command to delete instead.
>>
>> Emacs's UI generally assumes that the difference between "delete" and
>> "kill" is sufficiently minor that the trouble of providing both versions
>> is higher than the gain.
>>
>> IOW, use M-y (or a prefix arg to C-y) to get to the kill you care about.
>
> As Stefan says, it's not usually necessary.  M-y can skip past
> irrelevant kills.  Also, if you know you're going to add something
> useless to the kill ring, then you can just use backspace.  Getting rid
> of a word with backspace, in the few occasions when it's necessary,
> isn't that slow.
>
> But, in keyboard macros it can be troublesome.  If M-y has to be used in
> a macro that generally spells trouble.  Also, kills are slower than
> deletes.  For those reasons I define delete-word in the obvious way,
> like kill-word but using delete-region instead of kill-region.  I don't
> bind it to a key though, I just use M-x when I need it, which is only
> when using keyboard macros.

This is what registers are good for!

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Robert Thorpe]

Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:

>> But, in keyboard macros it can be troublesome.  If M-y has to be used in
>> a macro that generally spells trouble.  Also, kills are slower than
>> deletes.  For those reasons I define delete-word in the obvious way,
>> like kill-word but using delete-region instead of kill-region.  I don't
>> bind it to a key though, I just use M-x when I need it, which is only
>> when using keyboard macros.
>
> This is what registers are good for!

I should have thought of that.

BR,
Robert Thorpe

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Barry Margolin]

In article <mailman.6881.1457279069.843.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>,
 Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:

> > I should have been clearer, sorry.  `backward-kill-word` kills.  I wonder
> > why there is no corresponding command to delete instead.
> 
> Emacs's UI generally assumes that the difference between "delete" and
> "kill" is sufficiently minor that the trouble of providing both versions
> is higher than the gain.

If we had key bindings for all the "delete" operations, in addition to 
all the kills that we already have, it would take up lots of keys that 
are more useful for other things.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[egarrulo]

I have also noticed that `delete-region` is not on any key.  This could 
mean that -- before Transient Mark Mode became default -- 
`delete-region` was intentionally kept out of easy reach.  If this is 
the case, was it because the earliest Emacs versions lacked undo?

RE: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Drew Adams]

> I have also noticed that `delete-region` is not on any key.  This
> could mean that -- before Transient Mark Mode became default --
> `delete-region` was intentionally kept out of easy reach.  If this
> is the case, was it because the earliest Emacs versions lacked undo?

I don't think it was "intentionally kept out of easy reach" but
rather, as Stefan suggested, because interactively most people
want to kill text most of the time, instead of just deleting it.

It is trivial to define your own command `backward-kill-word'
and bind it to `M-<backspace>' or whatever.

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Yeechang Lee]

egarrulo wrote:
> I know how to define `backward-delete-word`, but if such a basic
> command were deemed useful by power users, it would ship with Emacs
> by now.

I sometimes wonder if Emacs users have so many commands they defined
long ago in ~/.emacs that they don't realize that they might be useful
for others in the stock code.

Example: I only realized/remembered the other day that my ~/.emacs has

(global-set-key (kbd "C-x p") 'previous-multiframe-window)
(global-set-key (kbd "C-x n") 'next-multiframe-window)

I almost certainly put it in almost immediately after starting with
Emacs more than two decades ago. Certainly, for the vast majority of
those two decades, I would have sworn that being able to move to the
next and previous window (as opposed to 'other-window, which is stock
on C-x o) is bound to keys by default.

-- 
geo:37.783333,-122.416667

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Marcin Borkowski]

On 2016-03-07, at 05:12, Yeechang Lee <ylee@columbia.edu> wrote:

> (global-set-key (kbd "C-x n") 'next-multiframe-window)

Of course, the above makes you miss the (extremely useful) narrowing
commands.

Best,

-- 
Marcin Borkowski
http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
Adam Mickiewicz University

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[egarrulo]

On 07/03/16 04:21, Robert Thorpe wrote:
> As Stefan says, it's not usually necessary.  M-y can skip past
> irrelevant kills.  Also, if you know you're going to add something
> useless to the kill ring, then you can just use backspace.  Getting rid
> of a word with backspace, in the few occasions when it's necessary,
> isn't that slow.
>
> But, in keyboard macros it can be troublesome.  If M-y has to be used in
> a macro that generally spells trouble.  Also, kills are slower than
> deletes.  For those reasons I define delete-word in the obvious way,
> like kill-word but using delete-region instead of kill-region.  I don't
> bind it to a key though, I just use M-x when I need it, which is only
> when using keyboard macros.

Your indirect explanation for the lack of a key for `delete-region` 
sounds plausible.

Maybe my question is a symptom of a more general problem: inexperienced 
Emacs users, don't know how to edit effectively with vanilla Emacs, 
especially when they come from mainstream editors.  The manual explains 
Emacs commands, but not how they "work" together.  For example, I 
remember a Emacs user commenting that it is often quicker to kill and 
yank some text, than to copy it.  Not very intuitive, I would say. 
Therefore, some users might feel frustrated because they are trying to 
accomplish something by unknowingly "going against the grain" of Emacs.

Re: Why does Emacs lack `backward-delete-word`?

[Marcin Borkowski]

On 2016-03-07, at 13:08, egarrulo <egarrulo@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 07/03/16 04:21, Robert Thorpe wrote:
>> As Stefan says, it's not usually necessary.  M-y can skip past
>> irrelevant kills.  Also, if you know you're going to add something
>> useless to the kill ring, then you can just use backspace.  Getting rid
>> of a word with backspace, in the few occasions when it's necessary,
>> isn't that slow.
>>
>> But, in keyboard macros it can be troublesome.  If M-y has to be used in
>> a macro that generally spells trouble.  Also, kills are slower than
>> deletes.  For those reasons I define delete-word in the obvious way,
>> like kill-word but using delete-region instead of kill-region.  I don't
>> bind it to a key though, I just use M-x when I need it, which is only
>> when using keyboard macros.
>
> Your indirect explanation for the lack of a key for `delete-region` 
> sounds plausible.
>
> Maybe my question is a symptom of a more general problem: inexperienced 
> Emacs users, don't know how to edit effectively with vanilla Emacs, 
> especially when they come from mainstream editors.  The manual explains 
> Emacs commands, but not how they "work" together.  For example, I 
> remember a Emacs user commenting that it is often quicker to kill and 
> yank some text, than to copy it.  Not very intuitive, I would say. 
> Therefore, some users might feel frustrated because they are trying to 
> accomplish something by unknowingly "going against the grain" of Emacs.

0. Good points.

1. Mickey Petersen's blog and book.

2. M-w.

Best,

-- 
Marcin Borkowski
http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
Adam Mickiewicz University