editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[cplum987]

How can I do one or both of the following:

(1) Find a previous command in the *shell* buffer via search C-s, and have pressing enter insert the command as the current command, but without execution. This would allow me to edit the command before executing it, but not have to modify the command as it previously exists in the *shell* buffer.

(2) type the first part of the command, and have M-p search for the previous occurrence of the command that starts with the same pattern I've typed in. This is an xemacs feature I sorely miss.  C-s just isn't the same. If often finds all sorts of other cruft you have to skip over.
thanks,

thanks,

Chris

RE: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[Doug Lewan]

> -----Original Message-----
> On
> Behalf Of cplum987
> Subject: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer
> 
> How can I do one or both of the following:
> 
> (1) Find a previous command in the *shell* buffer via search C-s, and
> have pressing enter insert the command as the current command, but
> without execution. This would allow me to edit the command before
> executing it, but not have to modify the command as it previously
> exists in the *shell* buffer.

I agree. This is a bit of a hole. I copy and paste and edit all the time.
It doesn't seem like it would be too hard to build, 
but it's probably too little to bother getting permission from my employer
to give away. :(

> 
> (2) type the first part of the command, and have M-p search for the
> previous occurrence of the command that starts with the same pattern
> I've typed in. This is an xemacs feature I sorely miss.  C-s just isn't
> the same. If often finds all sorts of other cruft you have to skip
> over.

This sounds like it would be a good addition. I use M-/ to do such a thing,
but that does get a little tedious.
Does the xemacs lisp port to GNU emacs?

> thanks,
> 
> Chris
[Doug Lewan] 


-- 
,Doug
Douglas Lewan
Shubert Ticketing
(201) 489-8600 ext 224 or ext 4335

The human brain is the most complex thing known to man, according to the human brain.

Re: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[HASM]

cplum987@gmail.com writes:

> How can I do one or both of the following:
>
> (1) Find a previous command in the *shell* buffer via search
> C-s, and have pressing enter insert the command as the
> current command, but without execution.

Doesn't M-r work for you?
  M-r runs the command comint-history-isearch-backward-regexp,
-- HASM

Re: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[cplum987]

On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 at 7:18:52 AM UTC-7, Doug Lewan wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > On
> > Behalf Of cplum987
> > Subject: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer
> > 
> > How can I do one or both of the following:
> > 
> > (1) Find a previous command in the *shell* buffer via search C-s, and
> > have pressing enter insert the command as the current command, but
> > without execution. This would allow me to edit the command before
> > executing it, but not have to modify the command as it previously
> > exists in the *shell* buffer.
> 
> I agree. This is a bit of a hole. I copy and paste and edit all the time.
> It doesn't seem like it would be too hard to build, 
> but it's probably too little to bother getting permission from my employer
> to give away. :(
> 
> > 
> > (2) type the first part of the command, and have M-p search for the
> > previous occurrence of the command that starts with the same pattern
> > I've typed in. This is an xemacs feature I sorely miss.  C-s just isn't
> > the same. If often finds all sorts of other cruft you have to skip
> > over.
> 
> This sounds like it would be a good addition. I use M-/ to do such a thing,
> but that does get a little tedious.
Looks like M-/ iterates through the command history just like M-p, but only includes the root command, not the arguments.

> Does the xemacs lisp port to GNU emacs?
I have no idea. Beyond my abilities for sure.

Re: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[cplum987]

On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 at 10:10:22 AM UTC-7, HASM wrote:
> 
> > How can I do one or both of the following:
> >
> > (1) Find a previous command in the *shell* buffer via search
> > C-s, and have pressing enter insert the command as the
> > current command, but without execution.
> 
> Doesn't M-r work for you?
>   M-r runs the command comint-history-isearch-backward-regexp,
> -- HASM

[BTW, I meant C-r, not C-s. My brain can never recall why my fingers type.]

M-r seems to be a step in the right direction. However, you don't know what command line it will grab until after you press <RET>. As an example, I just tried  "M-r cd<RET>". It found a command with "CD" in the middle of it. I wanted the one that started with "cd".

With xemacs, "cd M-p" would have found the most recent occurrence of a command that started with "cd", and entered it as the current command so I can edit it (it doesn't take you to the location in *shell* of the match like C-r does). No need to press <RET> first and hope it grabs the right one. Also, each time I type M-p after that, it will grab an even older instance of a command that starts with those same chars. So I just type the first few chars of the command, and then type M-p until xemacs finds the one I want.

Re: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[Barry Margolin]

In article <36243f68-c9ad-4185-af20-215cceecf0b3@googlegroups.com>,
 cplum987@gmail.com wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 at 10:10:22 AM UTC-7, HASM wrote:
> > 
> > > How can I do one or both of the following:
> > >
> > > (1) Find a previous command in the *shell* buffer via search
> > > C-s, and have pressing enter insert the command as the
> > > current command, but without execution.
> > 
> > Doesn't M-r work for you?
> >   M-r runs the command comint-history-isearch-backward-regexp,
> > -- HASM
> 
> [BTW, I meant C-r, not C-s. My brain can never recall why my fingers type.]
> 
> M-r seems to be a step in the right direction. However, you don't know what 
> command line it will grab until after you press <RET>. As an example, I just 
> tried  "M-r cd<RET>". It found a command with "CD" in the middle of it. I 
> wanted the one that started with "cd".

The parameter is a regular expression, so use "^cd" to find a command 
that begins with "cd".

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

Re: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[Robert Thorpe]

cplum987@gmail.com writes:

> [BTW, I meant C-r, not C-s. My brain can never recall why my fingers type.]
>
> M-r seems to be a step in the right direction. However, you don't know
> what command line it will grab until after you press <RET>. As an
> example, I just tried  "M-r cd<RET>". It found a command with "CD" in
> the middle of it. I wanted the one that started with "cd".

It's a regex as Barry Margolin mentioned, that's one way to narrow
things down.  Another is to search further.  M-r initiates a backwards
regex isearch of history.  When you meet a match C-r will continue the
search back to the next match.  (Typing M-r again switches from regex
search to normal search).

There are quite a few other commands available.  See (info "(emacs)
Shell Ring")

> With xemacs, "cd M-p" would have found the most recent occurrence of a
> command that started with "cd", and entered it as the current command
> so I can edit it (it doesn't take you to the location in *shell* of
> the match like C-r does). No need to press <RET> first and hope it
> grabs the right one. Also, each time I type M-p after that, it will
> grab an even older instance of a command that starts with those same
> chars. So I just type the first few chars of the command, and then
> type M-p until xemacs finds the one I want.

This sounds useful.  There's probably a package on Melpa or Marmalade to
do it.  But I don't know precisely where to start looking.

BR,
Robert Thorpe

Re: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[cplum987]

On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 at 5:20:56 PM UTC-7, Robert Thorpe wrote:
> 
> > M-r seems to be a step in the right direction. However, you don't know
> > what command line it will grab until after you press <RET>. As an
> > example, I just tried  "M-r cd<RET>". It found a command with "CD" in
> > the middle of it. I wanted the one that started with "cd".
> 
> It's a regex as Barry Margolin mentioned, that's one way to narrow
> things down.  Another is to search further.  M-r initiates a backwards
> regex isearch of history.  When you meet a match C-r will continue the
> search back to the next match.  (Typing M-r again switches from regex
> search to normal search).

I couldn't get M-r followed by C-r to work as you described. C-r reverts back to searching the previous pattern I searched with C-r, not the pattern I just searched with M-r.

However, I did not know that after doing the first M-r search, I could just repeatedly do "M-r <RET>" to search for previous occurrences. Still a bit awkward compared to just having to do M-p on xemacs, but at least is another step closer.

Re: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[Steve Perry]

cplum987@gmail.com writes:
> How can I do one or both of the following:
>
> ...
>
> (2) type the first part of the command, and have M-p search for the
> previous occurrence of the command that starts with the same pattern
> I've typed in. This is an xemacs feature I sorely miss.  C-s just
> isn't the same. If often finds all sorts of other cruft you have to
> skip over.
> thanks,

I bind M-p and M-n to comint-previous-matching-input-from-input and
comint-next-matching-input-from-input respectively which I think does
what you want...

Re: editing previous command in the *shell* buffer

[cplum987]

On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:57:34 AM UTC-7, Steve Perry wrote:
> > How can I do one or both of the following:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > (2) type the first part of the command, and have M-p search for the
> > previous occurrence of the command that starts with the same pattern
> > I've typed in. This is an xemacs feature I sorely miss.  C-s just
> > isn't the same. If often finds all sorts of other cruft you have to
> > skip over.
> > thanks,
> 
> I bind M-p and M-n to comint-previous-matching-input-from-input and
> comint-next-matching-input-from-input respectively which I think does
> what you want...

That's real close, but after typing the first few characters of the command, I then have to select them in order to get the matching to work. Otherwise it just works as M-p does by default.