@microsoft-github-policy-service agree

When I initially introduced the ViRegister class, I envisioned supporting copy/paste from the system clipboard as well.

In my mind, this would have been done using the " (double-quote) or + (plus-sign) named registers.
This way, at any single time, one can use the default unnamed register, or the system register as it is customary in vim and many VIM emulations.

May I respectfully ask what you think ? Would you mind me proposing my help to you on this feature ?

I see that you have done a ton of work for the documentation already, so this maybe a bit too late on my part… 😥

The docs weren't a lot of work, so I don't mind changing the feature and redoing them.

I've been using my branched PSReadLine personally since I posted the pull request. It works well, but there are some situations that have been annoying. If I delete a character, word, or line, the text always gets copied to the clipboard with my changes. Occasionally I actually do want to copy the text that I delete, but most of the time I don't. All of that to say... I want to change how my feature works before merging.

What if we did this compromise solution?

• Create another set of Vi command functions that copy to the system clipboard instead of the Vi Register. So we'd have a function that Yanks to the ViRegister and another that Yanks to the system clipboard. Same with paste, and delete commands. The user could then map keys to either command.

Reasons why I like this solution:

• Highly configurable. The user can decide which register to use for any keypress combination. It would provide them with the flexibility to do things like map p to paste from the system clipboard, map "p to paste from Vi register, but x deletes to the Vi register.
• It fixes my issue of deletes going to the system clipboard
• It could support my wish to default yy yank and p paste to system clipboard for fewer keypresses without needing a " prefix.
• It could support your idea of using "p for or "yy to access the system clipboard and p or yy to use the Vi register.
• Gets rid of the PSReadLineOption that I had created.

Thoughts?

Ryan West (@WestRyanK), thank you for your feedback.

That is an interesting proposal and I understand what you are trying to achieve. I do have some concerns though.

Mainly, I think if we strive to emulate the VIM keybindings and behaviour, using named registers would be the least surprising option. Deviating from this would create a kind of vim-but-not-quite-like emulation that may create a precedent for other behaviours that future users may want to include in all sorts of crazy ways.

Second, I think what you want could be achieved by using the builtin key-rebinding capabilities of PSRL. That is, you could create a custom profile that reassigns whatever key bindings you would like to the appropriate function or sequence of functions to use the default or the named register depending on your needs.

For instance, you would like to reassign yy to use the system clipboard instead of its default internal register. If we are careful enough to support public functions, that could be achieved using something like the following script in your $profile :

Set-PSReadLineKeyHandler ` 
    -ViMode Command `
    -Chord 'y,y' `
    -BriefDescription "Copy to clipboard" `
    -LongDescription "Yank a set of lines to the system clipboard" `
    -ScriptBlock {
    param($key, $arg)

    [Microsoft.PowerShell.PSConsoleReadLine]::ViSelectRegister($key, "+")
    [Microsoft.PowerShell.PSConsoleReadLine]::ViYankLine($key, $arg)
}

We could also include those snippets into the README.md of even in the sample profile file.

The way I see for implementing this would be:

• Create a new IClipboard interface to abstract away talking to a clipboard, either internal or from the system.
• Build a ViRegister with an injected IClipboard as it correctly handles linewise yanks and paste.
• Create two new implementations InternalClipboard and SystemClipboard to store/retrieve text from a clipboard.
• Hold a dictionary of ViRegister implementations, keyed by name:

private readonly ViRegister _clipboard;
private readonly ViRegister _systemClipboard;
private readonly IDictionary<string, ViRegister> _registers;
// ctor
static PSConsoleReadLine()
{
  _clipboard = new ViUnnamedRegister(_singleton);
  _systemClipboard = new ViSystemClipboard(_singleton);
  _registers  = new Dictionary<string, ViRegister>{
    [""] = _clipboard,
    ["\""] = _systemClipboard,
    ["+"] = _systemClipboard,
  }
}

• Create public functions to select the register, like the ViSelectRegister function shown in the snippet above
• Assign key-bindings to those functions

At this point, I think we would be mostly done.

It would be very easy to actually add named registers in the future: i.e creating public functions to create new registers on the fly but I would refrain from this in this PR.

Please, let me know how you feel about this.

Oh, I started implementing the feature based on your comments before I realized that you had actually implemented it yourself. I suppose I'll let you finish it then?

I would be more comfortable leaving the spirit of the changes to you.
Please, feel free to tear up my PR as you see fit and propose an iteration to the real project.
Would that work for you ?

I'm also wanting this ViClipboardMode as must have feature. What's needed to be done, to merge the PR? If any help is needed, I'm eager to contribute.

I think Ryan West (@WestRyanK) would rather have me merge my contributions as a separate PR.
As I can see there are interest growing around this feature, I need to carve some time and craft a PR based on my suggestions.
I refrained from doing so thus far because Ryan West (@WestRyanK) was the first to actually tackle the subject and propose a real implementation and I did not want to have that effort attributed to me.

I’m not saying my suggestions are the only good way to go for implementing this feature.
I’m just chiming in in the discussion because I’m the one that initially introduced support for "registers" in the code base and the way I did it was with the vision that I ultimately delivered with my suggestions.

If Lucas Amaral (@luqsthunder) you have the time and energy to do this more quickly than I can, please, feel free to work on this and submit a PR yourselves. Then I will help you lobby the maintainer team members here for merging. 😁

I think I cannot reasonably dedicate some time for this before at least a couple of weeks.

Lucas Amaral (@luqsthunder) I have submitted #4220 for review.