Re: is easy to get hung in infinite ^G stream; how to stop it?

[David Combs]

In article <jwvhdu2rg4g.fsf-monnier+gnu.emacs.help@gnu.org>,
Stefan Monnier  <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>> | cpml% vi foo.foo
>> | 
>> | [Using open mode]
>> |      1  
>> | "foo.foo" 3 lines, 45 characters 
>> |      1  
>> | 
>> |      2  .
>> | 
>> |      3  3
>> | 
>> | q
>> | 
>> |       <---- Tried a series of Control-C chars here
>> | |   <---- each line comes from a simple newline.
>> | 
>> | 
>> | 
>
>> Thanks for *any* hints on escaping from this hole!
>
>Have you tried to type `: q RET' ?
>
>
>        Stefan

Yep, have done, just like I was told to earlier --
with ZERO effect.


And Kai wants me to use eshell -- but I'm used to csh/tcsh,
and *really, really* don't want to get into bash,
and am not sure just what I must do to my .cshrc
to adjust it for eshell, and the info-doc that
comes with eshell seems *really* lacking in anything
useful as far as how to actually *use* the thing
(esp for a csh-user), ...

(using vi as the example to get the ^G^G... stuff
is only showing an easy way to get into the situation --
of course, that's not what I actually do, when
I *inadvertently*  trigger it -- actually, I
have little idea of what I did to cause it --
can't even do a "C-h l" at that time, to see what
I've recently entered as keystrokes.)

Please, can the gurus here try doing vi (as
simple way to cause the problem) in *shell* --
where M-x shell gets me into my standard shell, csh.

Then, see if *you* (said gurus) can escape.


Thanks!


PS: One puzzle: what's this stuff about how wonderful
"ed" is?  (Yes, is better than ex for *scripts*, for sure) --
how does it relate to this post?  Except to suggest
that when in *shell* I should use ed rather than vi --
again, vi is only an easy way to get the ^G problem
(and I very often do use ex from *shell*).


>From: patl@athena.mit.edu (Patrick J. LoPresti)
>Message-ID: <1991Jul11.031731.9260@athena.mit.edu>
>Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system)
>Subject: The True Path (long)
>Date: 11 Jul 91 03:17:31 GMT
>Path: 
>ai-lab!mintaka!olivea!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!athena.mit.edu!patl
>Newsgroups: alt.religion.emacs,alt.slack
>Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
>Lines: 95
>Xref: ai-lab alt.religion.emacs:244 alt.slack:1935
>
>When I log into my Xenix system with my 110 baud teletype, both vi
>*and* Emacs are just too damn slow.  They print useless messages like,
>'C-h for help' and '"foo" File is read only'.  So I use the editor
>that doesn't waste my VALUABLE time.
>
>Ed, man!  !man ed
>
>ED(1)               UNIX Programmer's Manual                ED(1)
>
>NAME
>     ed - text editor
>
>SYNOPSIS
>     ed [ - ] [ -x ] [ name ]
>DESCRIPTION
>     Ed is the standard text editor.
>---
>
>Computer Scientists love ed, not just because it comes first
>alphabetically, but because it's the standard.  Everyone else loves ed
>because it's ED!
>
>"Ed is the standard text editor."
>
...
...

>not be vi.  If you use ED, you are on THE PATH TO REDEMPTION.  THE
>SO-CALLED "VISUAL" EDITORS HAVE BEEN PLACED HERE BY ED TO TEMPT THE
>FAITHLESS.  DO NOT GIVE IN!!!  THE MIGHTY ED HAS SPOKEN!!!