Editor in beta 4.1

[Daniel Beckham]

No, it's been like this in every beta and I believe it's an integral part 
of KWrite... of all the wonderful things in the unix world, I find this to 
be the most irritating thing imaginable...  Kwrite isn't the only 
offender... almost every unix text editor does this..  It doesn't make any 
sense..   Kwrite and other editors make you perform several operations to 
replace a block of text with another...or if there is a short cut, it's 
non-standard:

Stupid Unix Way:

Select old text
Remove old text
Select new text / Copy'ed when selected
Place cursor at new position
Paste text into new position

If you forgot and copied the new text first, double the above number of 
steps...

If you already have your new stuff in the paste buffer, you can't select 
the old text to delete it quickly with the del key, you have to either 
delete one letter or word at a time, or if you are lucky, you can delete 
one line at a time...  If you happen to be at the new text and think "I 
need to copy this to the paste buffer to past later", you are shit out of luck.

Better Win32 Way (The only thing they ever got right!!)

Select new text
Copy New Text
Select Old Text
Paste New Text

I can actually work 1000 times faster in a win32 editor like TextPad simply 
because I can cut and paste text much more efficiently.

My 2 cents.

Daniel

At 08:17 PM 11/20/99 +0100, you wrote:
>   Hi,
>
>Hope this little question won't reduce the signal/noise ratio :
>in beta 4.1, it seems a selection in the editor is automatically copied
>in the clipboard.
>As a result, it's impossible to replace a selection by a previous one:
>instead, you paste the current selection in the middle of itself (if you
>double-clicked in the middle, that is).
>
>I don't think it behaved like this in previous betas, and I haven't
>managed to find options to correct this ("delete on input" works fine,
>but it's not sufficient : double-click should not copy the selection in
>the clipboard, ctrl-c is there for that. I've also disabled "multiple
>selections"...).
>
>Well, maybe there's a way to do that which I've overlooked ?
>Thanks for any answer,
>Renaud
>