On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 11:42:02PM -0700, Andy Bradford wrote:
> When I type:  3yy and move the  cursor down 10 lines with  10j, and then
> press p, I expect my cursor to remain on that line so I can then press O
> to open  a new line above  the lines I  just pasted. It seems  like your
> proposed  change would  have me  now  paste my  lines and  then have  to
> remember that I yanked three lines so I can move my cursor back using 3k
> to open a line above them? What  happens if I have saved my yanked lines
> in a named buffer and don't remember how many lines are in it? Oh, sure,
> I guess I can use "disp b" to  look at the named buffers and count them,
> but that's  something I've rarely needed  to do. I rarely,  if ever have
> needed  to paste  a buffer  3 times  in a  row to  achieve the  supposed
> problem that you describe.
> 
> Is this usage enhanced by your proposed change?  If so, how?

What if the intention is to continue editing *after* the pasted text?
This reverses the situation, in this case the advantage is for the
behavior I propose.  At this point, someone may think that "current
behavior vs. proposed one" contest is tied, right?  However, who really
paid attention to all what my diff does, surely noticed that I
intentionally left the 'P' command untouched.  If you want the cursor to
land in the first line of the pasted block you can just position the
cursor in the next line and type 'P'.  This means that, at least in the
particular case you described, the behavior I propose represents a
win-win situation.


-- 
Walter