Re: comint-insert-input on non-command lines: A trivial fix, a quibble, and a bug

[Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>]

 >    There is also a comment by comint-use-prompt-regexp (also present in
 >    21.3):
 > 
 >    ;; Note: If it is decided to purge comint-prompt-regexp from the source
 >    ;; entirely, searching for uses of this variable will help to identify
 >    ;; places that need attention.
 > 
 > Note that it says "If" not "When".  In as far as I know there has
 > never been a decision made to plan to remove comint-use-prompt-regexp
 > in the future.

Yes, I understand the difference between "If" and "When".  Clearly a decision
hasn't been made because both the comment and variable are still there.  Its
just that if someone has suggested it might be done, there probably is a good
reason for doing it.  Since it was broken, now might have been a good time to
do it.  It was also written five or more years ago, during which the use of
fields has probably increased.

 > I believe that comint-use-prompt-regexp serves two purposes:
 > 
 > 1.  A customizable option for people who do not like some of the
 >     unintuitive (to them) aspects of fields in Comint buffers, like
 >     unusual behavior of many motion commands.  (For instance paragraph
 >     commands in shell mode.)
 > 
 > 2.  Potentially a matter of necessity should the heuristic for
 >     distinguishing input from output used when comint-use-prompt-regexp
 >     is nil malfunction.  In that case the Comint derived mode can fall
 >     back on using regeps to recognize prompts.

Since Miles has provided a patch that fixes the bug you pointed out, there
is no longer an immediate need to purge comint-prompt-regexp in any case


-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob