RE: forward-sentence

["Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

Hi Sean,

> If the desire is to edit the end of a sentence,

I don't think it is.  The desire is to move forward by one or more sentences.

When you use M-f is the desire necessarily to edit the last char in the symbol
name?

> why is it that M-e moves point past the punctuation?

The punctuation is part of the sentence.  M-e moves past the sentence.

> To my way of thinking, there is a disjunction between say M-f and M-e;
> between M-b and M-a.  Do 'em.  Doesn't it bug you?  Bugs me.

No, I don't see any discrepancy.  M-f moves past the symbol; M-e moves past the
sentence.  M-b moves to the beginning of the symbol; M-a moves to the beginning
of the sentence.

C-h k M-a

...Move backward to start of sentence.

C-h k M-e

...Move forward to next end of sentence.

The latter could be better with "past" instead of "to", but either can be
correct depending on what is meant by "end of sentence".  (I would prefer
"past".)

If you follow the link for variable `sentence-end' (which presumably determines
what is meant by "end of sentence"), and then you follow the link from there for
function `sentence-end" (whew!), you finally get to the regexp that defines the
end of a sentence in the current context.  This regexp shows that "end of
sentence" includes any whitespace after the punctuation, so "to next end of
sentence" is strictly correct here.  But I would still think that "past" would
be better than "to" here, relying on an ordinary, informal understanding of "end
of sentence", which does not include trailing whitespace.