6 added 179 characters in body
source | link

The default mode for bash, the public domain variants of ksh (pdksh, mksh, oksh), tcsh and zsh is the emacs mode (though with zsh, it's vi if your $EDITOR is vi), while in the AT&T ksh, it's the dumb mode unless (and you need to issue a$EDITOR or set -o $VISUAL mentions vi or set -o emacs to get.

ksh also later added a line editor (or start withgmacs mode to accommodate users of Gosling ksh -o emacs...)) that handled Ctrl+T differently.

The default mode for bash, the public domain variants of ksh (pdksh, mksh, oksh), tcsh and zsh is the emacs mode (though with zsh, it's vi if your $EDITOR is vi), while in the AT&T ksh, it's the dumb mode (and you need to issue a set -o vi or set -o emacs to get a line editor (or start with ksh -o emacs...)).

The default mode for bash, the public domain variants of ksh (pdksh, mksh, oksh), tcsh and zsh is the emacs mode (though with zsh, it's vi if your $EDITOR is vi), while in the AT&T ksh, it's the dumb mode unless $EDITOR or $VISUAL mentions vi or emacs.

ksh also later added a gmacs mode to accommodate users of Gosling emacs that handled Ctrl+T differently.

5 added 940 characters in body
source | link

According to https://www.usenix.org/legacy/publications/library/proceedings/vhll/full_papers/korn.ksh.a:

The popular inline editing features (vi and emacs mode) of ksh were created by software developers at Bell Laboratories; the vi line editing mode by Pat Sullivan, and the emacs line editing mode by Mike Veach. Each had independently modified the Bourne shell to add these features, and both were in organizations that wanted to use ksh only if ksh had their respective inline editor. Originally the idea of adding command line editing to ksh was rejected in the hope that line editing would move into the terminal driver. However, when it became clear that this was not likely to happen soon, both line editing modes were integrated into ksh and made optional so that they could be disabled on systems that provided editing as part of the terminal interface.

So instead, they implemented both and an interface for users to choose between the two. ksh was most probably the first in the early 80s (emacsreusing code that had been written separately to add a vi mode and vian emacs mode added in 1982,to the Bourne shell as seen above) followed by tcsh (tcsh initially only had emacs key binding, vi mode was added later) and later bash and zsh in the early 90s.

So instead, they implemented both and an interface for users to choose between the two. ksh was most probably the first (emacs and vi mode added in 1982, followed by tcsh (tcsh initially only had emacs key binding, vi mode was added later) and later bash and zsh in the early 90s.

According to https://www.usenix.org/legacy/publications/library/proceedings/vhll/full_papers/korn.ksh.a:

The popular inline editing features (vi and emacs mode) of ksh were created by software developers at Bell Laboratories; the vi line editing mode by Pat Sullivan, and the emacs line editing mode by Mike Veach. Each had independently modified the Bourne shell to add these features, and both were in organizations that wanted to use ksh only if ksh had their respective inline editor. Originally the idea of adding command line editing to ksh was rejected in the hope that line editing would move into the terminal driver. However, when it became clear that this was not likely to happen soon, both line editing modes were integrated into ksh and made optional so that they could be disabled on systems that provided editing as part of the terminal interface.

So instead, they implemented both and an interface for users to choose between the two. ksh was most probably the first in the early 80s (reusing code that had been written separately to add a vi mode and an emacs mode to the Bourne shell as seen above) followed by tcsh (tcsh initially only had emacs key binding, vi mode was added later) and later bash and zsh in the early 90s.

4 added 336 characters in body
source | link

So instead, they implemented both and an interface for users to choose between the two. I think tcshksh was most probably the first (emacs and vi mode added in 1982, thenfollowed by kshtcsh (tcsh initially only had emacs key binding, vi mode was added later) and later bash and zsh in the early 90s.

POSIX actually specifies the vi mode and not the emacs mode for sh (the story has that Richard Stallman objected to POSIX specifying the emacs mode for sh).

So instead, they implemented both and an interface for users to choose between the two. I think tcsh was the first, then ksh and later bash and zsh.

POSIX actually specifies the vi mode and not the emacs mode for sh.

So instead, they implemented both and an interface for users to choose between the two. ksh was most probably the first (emacs and vi mode added in 1982, followed by tcsh (tcsh initially only had emacs key binding, vi mode was added later) and later bash and zsh in the early 90s.

POSIX actually specifies the vi mode and not the emacs mode for sh (the story has that Richard Stallman objected to POSIX specifying the emacs mode for sh).

3 edited body
source | link
2 added 867 characters in body
source | link
1
source | link