Re: mark-word

[David Kastrup]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:

> Andreas Röhler writes:
>
>  > If mark-word is called while inside a word, it marks
>  > from this point until the end of word first AFAIS, thus
>  > leaving the first part of the word unmarked.
>
>  > IMO marking the word-at-point completely then would be
>  > a more convenient behaviour.
>
> `mark-word' itself should remain compatible with `kill-word' and
> `mark-sexp'.  I think it would be a good idea to have a
> `mark-entire-word' command and bind it to M-@, especially since C-@
> doesn't mark a character.  Ditto `mark-entire-sexp' and address@hidden

Since "mark whole ..." for both directions is useful for more than
words, I think it would be more useful to have a prefix for that.

C-u C-u feels natural for "both directions", but to make it
non-surprising, one would likely have to assign separate meaning to C-u
(as opposed to C-u 4).  So probably rather C-u address@hidden

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum