Re: comint-insert-input on non-command lines:

[Luc Teirlinck <teirllm@dms.auburn.edu>]

Nick Roberts wrote:

   Anyway, my position seems to be increasingly untenable so I've put
   comint-copy-old-input back on C-c RET and comint-insert-input just
   on mouse-2.  As you are more enthusiastic about this arrangement
   than me, could you please update the docs.  I don't intend to make
   any further changes to comint.el so you are free to do so if you
   wish.

I will update the docs as soon as I am sure that Richard does not
object against reverting this change.  From Miles' response, I got the
impression that he does not object.  (I believe that Miles is still
the Comint maintainer.)

I believe that if we are not ready to just expunge
`comint-use-prompt-regexp' entirely, and I do not believe that we are,
then the only way of avoiding a non-nil value of
`comint-use-prompt-regexp' to lead to very different behavior not
directly related to field motion, was to revert the change.  The
difference would have been substantial in certain derived modes such
as Inferior Lisp mode.

Unless Richard or Miles objects, I will just make the comint-insert-input
binding of mouse-2 undefined if `comint-use-prompt-regexp' is non-nil,
since that function is field-specific and one can simply not make
yanking impossible in the entire buffer.

I would leave RET (comint-send-input) as it is.  It could be
considered somewhat dangerous, but it has had its current behavior for
ages now.  I will better document the behavior.

Sincerely,

Luc.