Re: repeat vs. zap-to-char

Re: repeat vs. zap-to-char

[Johan Bockgård]

Dan Jacobson <jidanni@dman.ddts.net> writes:


> C-x z runs the command repeat
> to repeat
> ESC z runs the command zap-to-char
> when my luck ran out as one has to tell it again and again to zap the
> same character.
[...]
> Yes, repeat takes an argument, but still...

C-x ESC ESC runs the command repeat-complex-command

Edit and re-evaluate last complex command, or ARGth from last.
A complex command is one which used the minibuffer. [...]


-- 
The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the
day they start making vacuum cleaners. -- Ernst Jan Plugge

Re: repeat vs. zap-to-char

[Dan Jacobson]

My point was that the dream of the ease of using C-x z z z z... fades
when meeting zap-to-char.  Your proposal of using

J> C-x ESC ESC runs the command repeat-complex-command

means C-x ESC ESC RET would have be typed each repetition, 4 vs. 1
keys for each repetition, if we were able to use repeat to ... hold on
a second... of course: a a a a a a a a a a a a a C-a <escape> z a C-x
<escape> <escape> <return> C-x z z z z z z z z z z z OK, never mind.
However maybe the documentation to the "repeat" command should mention
this technique to handle cases like zap-to-char.
-- 
http://jidanni.org/ Taiwan(04)25854780

repeat vs. zap-to-char

[Dan Jacobson]

There I was, all dressed in festive gear like rappers EPMD in their
"please listen to my demo" song, all ready to use:
C-x z runs the command repeat
to repeat
ESC z runs the command zap-to-char
when my luck ran out as one has to tell it again and again to zap the
same character.  Anyway, as the Morris the Cat commercial said, "Big
expectations, big let down."
Yes, repeat takes an argument, but still...
-- 
http://jidanni.org/ Taiwan(04)25854780