Mercurial > emacs
view lisp/repeat.el @ 96280:bfca3297fa0b
* bookmark.el (bookmark-alist): Allow the 2 slightly different formats
used until now in bookmark.el's code.
(bookmark-get-bookmark): Accept bookmark names or bookmark records.
(bookmark-get-bookmark-record): Allow the 2 slightly different formats
used until now in bookmark.el's code.
(bookmark-set-filename): Remove special code, moved to its only caller.
(bookmark-store): Use the newer format.
(bookmark-make-record-default): Add arg `point-only'.
Rename from bookmark-make-record-for-text-file.
(bookmark--jump-via): New function.
(bookmark-jump, bookmark-jump-other-window, bookmark-bmenu-2-window)
(bookmark-bmenu-other-window, bookmark-bmenu-switch-other-window):
Use it.
(bookmark-jump-noselect, bookmark-default-handler):
Don't return an alist, instead return the data implicitly by changing
current buffer and point. Signal an error if the file doesn't exist.
* info.el (Info-bookmark-make-record):
Use bookmark-make-record-default.
(Info-bookmark-jump): Use bookmark-default-handler.
* image-mode.el (image-bookmark-make-record):
Use bookmark-make-record-default.
(image-bookmark-jump): Use bookmark-default-handler.
* doc-view.el (doc-view-bookmark-make-record):
Use bookmark-make-record-default.
(doc-view-bookmark-jump): Use bookmark-default-handler.
author | Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> |
---|---|
date | Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:51:33 +0000 |
parents | ee5932bf781d |
children | a9dc0e7c3f2b |
line wrap: on
line source
;;; repeat.el --- convenient way to repeat the previous command ;; Copyright (C) 1998, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, ;; 2006, 2007, 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc. ;; Author: Will Mengarini <seldon@eskimo.com> ;; Created: Mo 02 Mar 98 ;; Version: 0.51, We 13 May 98 ;; Keywords: convenience, vi, repeat ;; This file is part of GNU Emacs. ;; GNU Emacs is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify ;; it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by ;; the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or ;; (at your option) any later version. ;; GNU Emacs is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, ;; but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of ;; MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the ;; GNU General Public License for more details. ;; You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License ;; along with GNU Emacs. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. ;;; Commentary: ;; Sometimes the fastest way to get something done is just to lean on a key; ;; moving forward through a series of words by leaning on M-f is an example. ;; But 'forward-page is orthodoxily bound to C-x ], so moving forward through ;; several pages requires ;; Loop until desired page is reached: ;; Hold down control key with left pinkie. ;; Tap <x>. ;; Lift left pinkie off control key. ;; Tap <]>. ;; This is a pain in the ass. ;; This package defines a command that repeats the preceding command, ;; whatever that was, including its arguments, whatever they were. ;; This command is connected to the key C-x z. ;; To repeat the previous command once, type C-x z. ;; To repeat it a second time immediately after, type just z. ;; By typing z again and again, you can repeat the command over and over. ;; This works correctly inside a keyboard macro as far as recording and ;; playback go, but `edit-kbd-macro' gets it wrong. That shouldn't really ;; matter; if you need to edit something like ;; C-x ] ;; forward-page ;; C-x z ;; repeat ;; zz ;; self-insert-command * 2 ;; C-x ;; Control-X-prefix ;; you can just kill the bogus final 2 lines, then duplicate the repeat line ;; as many times as it's really needed. Also, `edit-kbd-macro' works ;; correctly if `repeat' is invoked through a rebinding to a single keystroke ;; and the global variable repeat-on-final-keystroke is set to a value ;; that doesn't include that keystroke. For example, the lines ;; (global-set-key "\C-z" 'repeat) ;; (setq repeat-on-final-keystroke "z") ;; in your .emacs would allow `edit-kbd-macro' to work correctly when C-z was ;; used in a keyboard macro to invoke `repeat', but would still allow C-x z ;; to be used for `repeat' elsewhere. The real reason for documenting this ;; isn't that anybody would need it for the `edit-kbd-macro' problem, but ;; that there might be other unexpected ramifications of re-executing on ;; repetitions of the final keystroke, and this shows how to do workarounds. ;; If the preceding command had a prefix argument, that argument is applied ;; to the repeat command, unless the repeat command is given a new prefix ;; argument, in which case it applies that new prefix argument to the ;; preceding command. This means a key sequence like C-u - C-x C-t can be ;; repeated. (It shoves the preceding line upward in the buffer.) ;; Here are some other key sequences with which repeat might be useful: ;; C-u - C-t [shove preceding character backward in line] ;; C-u - M-t [shove preceding word backward in sentence] ;; C-x ^ enlarge-window [one line] (assuming frame has > 1 window) ;; C-u - C-x ^ [shrink window one line] ;; C-x ` next-error ;; C-u - C-x ` [previous error] ;; C-x DEL backward-kill-sentence ;; C-x e call-last-kbd-macro ;; C-x r i insert-register ;; C-x r t string-rectangle ;; C-x TAB indent-rigidly [one character] ;; C-u - C-x TAB [outdent rigidly one character] ;; C-x { shrink-window-horizontally ;; C-x } enlarge-window-horizontally ;; This command was first called `vi-dot', because ;; it was inspired by the `.' command in the vi editor, ;; but it was renamed to make its name more meaningful. ;;; Code: ;;;;; ************************* USER OPTIONS ************************** ;;;;; (defcustom repeat-too-dangerous '(kill-this-buffer) "Commands too dangerous to repeat with \\[repeat]." :group 'convenience :type '(repeat function)) ;; If the last command was self-insert-command, the char to be inserted was ;; obtained by that command from last-command-char, which has now been ;; clobbered by the command sequence that invoked `repeat'. We could get it ;; from (recent-keys) & set last-command-char to that, "unclobbering" it, but ;; this has the disadvantage that if the user types a sequence of different ;; chars then invokes repeat, only the final char will be inserted. In vi, ;; the dot command can reinsert the entire most-recently-inserted sequence. (defvar repeat-message-function nil "If non-nil, function used by `repeat' command to say what it's doing. Message is something like \"Repeating command glorp\". To disable such messages, set this variable to `ignore'. To customize display, assign a function that takes one string as an arg and displays it however you want.") (defcustom repeat-on-final-keystroke t "Allow `repeat' to re-execute for repeating lastchar of a key sequence. If this variable is t, `repeat' determines what key sequence it was invoked by, extracts the final character of that sequence, and re-executes as many times as that final character is hit; so for example if `repeat' is bound to C-x z, typing C-x z z z repeats the previous command 3 times. If this variable is a sequence of characters, then re-execution only occurs if the final character by which `repeat' was invoked is a member of that sequence. If this variable is nil, no re-execution occurs." :group 'convenience :type 'boolean) ;;;;; ****************** HACKS TO THE REST OF EMACS ******************* ;;;;; ;; The basic strategy is to use last-command, a variable built in to Emacs. ;; There are 2 issues that complicate this strategy. The first is that ;; last-command is given a bogus value when any kill command is executed; ;; this is done to make it easy for `yank-pop' to know that it's being invoked ;; after a kill command. The second is that the meaning of the command is ;; often altered by the prefix arg, but although Emacs (19.34) has a ;; builtin prefix-arg specifying the arg for the next command, as well as a ;; builtin current-prefix-arg, it has no builtin last-prefix-arg. ;; There's a builtin (this-command-keys), the return value of which could be ;; executed with (command-execute), but there's no (last-command-keys). ;; Using (last-command-keys) if it existed wouldn't be optimal, however, ;; since it would complicate checking membership in repeat-too-dangerous. ;; It would of course be trivial to implement last-prefix-arg & ;; true-last-command by putting something in post-command-hook, but that ;; entails a performance hit; the approach taken below avoids that. ;; Coping with strings of self-insert commands gets hairy when they interact ;; with auto-filling. Most problems are eliminated by remembering what we're ;; self-inserting, so we only need to get it from the undo information once. ;; With Emacs 22.2 the variable `last-repeatable-command' stores the ;; most recently executed command that was not bound to an input event. ;; `repeat' now repeats that command instead of `real-last-command' to ;; avoid a "... must be bound to an event with parameters" error. (defvar repeat-last-self-insert nil "If last repeated command was `self-insert-command', it inserted this.") ;; That'll require another keystroke count so we know we're in a string of ;; repetitions of self-insert commands: (defvar repeat-num-input-keys-at-self-insert -1 "# key sequences read in Emacs session when `self-insert-command' repeated.") ;;;;; *************** ANALOGOUS HACKS TO `repeat' ITSELF **************** ;;;;; ;; That mechanism of checking num-input-keys to figure out what's really ;; going on can be useful to other commands that need to fine-tune their ;; interaction with repeat. Instead of requiring them to advise repeat, we ;; can just defvar the value they need here, & setq it in the repeat command: (defvar repeat-num-input-keys-at-repeat -1 "# key sequences read in Emacs session when `repeat' last invoked.") ;; Also, we can assign a name to the test for which that variable is ;; intended, which thereby documents here how to use it, & makes code that ;; uses it self-documenting: (defsubst repeat-is-really-this-command () "Return t if this command is happening because user invoked `repeat'. Usually, when a command is executing, the Emacs builtin variable `this-command' identifies the command the user invoked. Some commands modify that variable on the theory they're doing more good than harm; `repeat' does that, and usually does do more good than harm. However, like all do-gooders, sometimes `repeat' gets surprising results from its altruism. The value of this function is always whether the value of `this-command' would've been 'repeat if `repeat' hadn't modified it." (= repeat-num-input-keys-at-repeat num-input-keys)) ;; An example of the use of (repeat-is-really-this-command) may still be ;; available in <http://www.eskimo.com/~seldon/dotemacs.el>; search for ;; "defun wm-switch-buffer". ;;;;; ******************* THE REPEAT COMMAND ITSELF ******************* ;;;;; (defvar repeat-previous-repeated-command nil "The previous repeated command.") ;; The following variable counts repeated self-insertions. The idea is ;; that repeating a self-insertion command and subsequently undoing it ;; should have almost the same effect as if the characters were inserted ;; manually. The basic difference is that we leave in one undo-boundary ;; between the original insertion and its first repetition. (defvar repeat-undo-count nil "Number of self-insertions since last `undo-boundary'.") ;;;###autoload (defun repeat (repeat-arg) "Repeat most recently executed command. With prefix arg, apply new prefix arg to that command; otherwise, use the prefix arg that was used before (if any). This command is like the `.' command in the vi editor. If this command is invoked by a multi-character key sequence, it can then be repeated by repeating the final character of that sequence. This behavior can be modified by the global variable `repeat-on-final-keystroke'. `repeat' ignores commands bound to input events. Hence the term \"most recently executed command\" shall be read as \"most recently executed command not bound to an input event\"." ;; The most recently executed command could be anything, so surprises could ;; result if it were re-executed in a context where new dynamically ;; localized variables were shadowing global variables in a `let' clause in ;; here. (Remember that GNU Emacs 19 is dynamically localized.) ;; To avoid that, I tried the `lexical-let' of the Common Lisp extensions, ;; but that entails a very noticeable performance hit, so instead I use the ;; "repeat-" prefix, reserved by this package, for *local* variables that ;; might be visible to re-executed commands, including this function's arg. (interactive "P") (when (eq last-repeatable-command 'repeat) (setq last-repeatable-command repeat-previous-repeated-command)) (cond ((null last-repeatable-command) (error "There is nothing to repeat")) ((eq last-repeatable-command 'mode-exit) (error "last-repeatable-command is mode-exit & can't be repeated")) ((memq last-repeatable-command repeat-too-dangerous) (error "Command %S too dangerous to repeat automatically" last-repeatable-command))) (setq this-command last-repeatable-command repeat-previous-repeated-command last-repeatable-command repeat-num-input-keys-at-repeat num-input-keys) (when (null repeat-arg) (setq repeat-arg last-prefix-arg)) ;; Now determine whether to loop on repeated taps of the final character ;; of the key sequence that invoked repeat. The Emacs global ;; last-command-char contains the final character now, but may not still ;; contain it after the previous command is repeated, so the character ;; needs to be saved. (let ((repeat-repeat-char (if (eq repeat-on-final-keystroke t) last-command-char ;; allow only specified final keystrokes (car (memq last-command-char (listify-key-sequence repeat-on-final-keystroke)))))) (if (memq last-repeatable-command '(exit-minibuffer minibuffer-complete-and-exit self-insert-and-exit)) (let ((repeat-command (car command-history))) (repeat-message "Repeating %S" repeat-command) (eval repeat-command)) (if (null repeat-arg) (repeat-message "Repeating command %S" last-repeatable-command) (setq current-prefix-arg repeat-arg) (repeat-message "Repeating command %S %S" repeat-arg last-repeatable-command)) (if (eq last-repeatable-command 'self-insert-command) (let ((insertion (if (<= (- num-input-keys repeat-num-input-keys-at-self-insert) 1) repeat-last-self-insert (let ((range (nth 1 buffer-undo-list))) (condition-case nil (setq repeat-last-self-insert (buffer-substring (car range) (cdr range))) (error (error "%s %s %s" ;Danger, Will Robinson! "repeat can't intuit what you" "inserted before auto-fill" "clobbered it, sorry"))))))) (setq repeat-num-input-keys-at-self-insert num-input-keys) ;; If the self-insert had a repeat count, INSERTION ;; includes that many copies of the same character. ;; So use just the first character ;; and repeat it the right number of times. (setq insertion (substring insertion -1)) (let ((count (prefix-numeric-value repeat-arg)) (i 0)) ;; Run pre- and post-command hooks for self-insertion too. (run-hooks 'pre-command-hook) (cond ((not repeat-undo-count)) ((< repeat-undo-count 20) ;; Don't make an undo-boundary here. (setq repeat-undo-count (1+ repeat-undo-count))) (t ;; Make an undo-boundary after 20 repetitions only. (undo-boundary) (setq repeat-undo-count 1))) (while (< i count) (repeat-self-insert insertion) (setq i (1+ i))) (run-hooks 'post-command-hook))) (let ((indirect (indirect-function last-repeatable-command))) ;; Make each repetition undo separately. (undo-boundary) (if (or (stringp indirect) (vectorp indirect)) ;; Bind real-last-command so that executing the macro does ;; not alter it. Do the same for last-repeatable-command. (let ((real-last-command real-last-command) (last-repeatable-command last-repeatable-command)) (execute-kbd-macro last-repeatable-command)) (run-hooks 'pre-command-hook) (call-interactively last-repeatable-command) (run-hooks 'post-command-hook))))) (when repeat-repeat-char ;; A simple recursion here gets into trouble with max-lisp-eval-depth ;; on long sequences of repetitions of a command like `forward-word' ;; (only 32 repetitions are possible given the default value of 200 for ;; max-lisp-eval-depth), but if I now locally disable the repeat char I ;; can iterate indefinitely here around a single level of recursion. (let (repeat-on-final-keystroke ;; Bind `undo-inhibit-record-point' to t in order to avoid ;; recording point in `buffer-undo-list' here. We have to ;; do this since the command loop does not set the last ;; position of point thus confusing the point recording ;; mechanism when inserting or deleting text. (undo-inhibit-record-point t)) (setq real-last-command 'repeat) (setq repeat-undo-count 1) (unwind-protect (while (eq (read-event) repeat-repeat-char) (repeat repeat-arg)) ;; Make sure `repeat-undo-count' is reset. (setq repeat-undo-count nil)) (setq unread-command-events (list last-input-event)))))) (defun repeat-self-insert (string) (let ((i 0)) (while (< i (length string)) (let ((last-command-char (aref string i))) (self-insert-command 1)) (setq i (1+ i))))) (defun repeat-message (format &rest args) "Like `message' but displays with `repeat-message-function' if non-nil." (let ((message (apply 'format format args))) (if repeat-message-function (funcall repeat-message-function message) (message "%s" message)))) ;; OK, there's one situation left where that doesn't work correctly: when the ;; most recent self-insertion provoked an auto-fill. The problem is that ;; unravelling the undo information after an auto-fill is too hard, since all ;; kinds of stuff can get in there as a result of comment prefixes etc. It'd ;; be possible to advise do-auto-fill to record the most recent ;; self-insertion before it does its thing, but that's a performance hit on ;; auto-fill, which already has performance problems; so it's better to just ;; leave it like this. If text didn't provoke an auto-fill when the user ;; typed it, this'll correctly repeat its self-insertion, even if the ;; repetition does cause auto-fill. ;; If you wanted perfection, probably it'd be necessary to hack do-auto-fill ;; into 2 functions, maybe-do-auto-fill & really-do-auto-fill, because only ;; really-do-auto-fill should be advised. As things are, either the undo ;; information would need to be scanned on every do-auto-fill invocation, or ;; the code at the top of do-auto-fill deciding whether filling is necessary ;; would need to be duplicated in the advice, wasting execution time when ;; filling does turn out to be necessary. ;; I thought maybe this story had a moral, something about functional ;; decomposition; but now I'm not even sure of that, since a function ;; call per se is a performance hit, & even the code that would ;; correspond to really-do-auto-fill has performance problems that ;; can make it necessary to stop typing while Emacs catches up. ;; Maybe the real moral is that perfection is a chimera. ;; Ah, hell, it's all going to fall into a black hole someday anyway. ;;;;; ************************* EMACS CONTROL ************************* ;;;;; (provide 'repeat) ;; arch-tag: cd569600-a1ad-4fa7-9062-bb91dfeaf1db ;;; repeat.el ends here