From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mattias =?UTF-8?Q?Engdeg=C3=A5rd?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#24902: 25.1; C-x = for Unicode Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 16:38:22 +0100 Message-ID: <4CEFB383-E7C8-4AA8-9B43-6267E5523DC3@acm.org> References: <87a6fl5w11.fsf@gnus.org> <14F24EE3-901E-4622-8210-6C4F2134E9BA@acm.org> <87czkh1jqo.fsf@gnus.org> <87pmoh3xdk.fsf@gnus.org> <877dap3uea.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17948"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Ulrich Windl , 24902@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 25 17:21:45 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nCOZk-0004UJ-7L for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 17:21:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33390 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nCOZj-0006fd-6b for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 11:21:43 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38402) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nCNui-0005vf-LA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 10:39:20 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:56855) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nCNuQ-0002xF-KD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 10:39:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nCNuQ-0007Xx-Go for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 10:39:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Mattias =?UTF-8?Q?Engdeg=C3=A5rd?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 15:39:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 24902 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: wontfix Original-Received: via spool by 24902-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B24902.164312511128956 (code B ref 24902); Tue, 25 Jan 2022 15:39:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 24902) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Jan 2022 15:38:31 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49756 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nCNtv-0007Wy-3X for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 10:38:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail235c50.megamailservers.eu ([91.136.10.245]:35522 helo=mail56c50.megamailservers.eu) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nCNtr-0007Wf-Mw for 24902@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 10:38:29 -0500 X-Authenticated-User: mattiase@bredband.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=megamailservers.eu; s=maildub; t=1643125105; bh=pbUu4lsX2bE9WG2IRu3wN2v1L/W9xIrofy76OHx+Y6E=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=mQ0d7lTHlzeBy395bXHyZZbx4V6Ffi5G2MRHgyz6F0emLA8vI4wxfDDId0qKKO5iF 7gkbvcNqHJHHOzt2F53J1M7GS+R6n0mFNl7d+RpS+qLAd7bojxqSieWjOdFLSLedp8 ARqDV7u0CXROwzjcjFr+IkX5hD++PGG77b6ThoF0= Feedback-ID: mattiase@acm.or Original-Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-b952e353.032-75-73746f71.bbcust.telenor.se [83.227.82.185]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail56c50.megamailservers.eu (8.14.9/8.13.1) with ESMTP id 20PFcNuU016906; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 15:38:24 +0000 In-Reply-To: <877dap3uea.fsf@gnus.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13) X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A742F16.61F01971.003A, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0 X-CTCH-VOD: Unknown X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown X-CTCH-Score: 0.000 X-CTCH-Flags: 0 X-CTCH-ScoreCust: 0.000 X-Origin-Country: SE X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:225198 Archived-At: 24 jan. 2022 kl. 18.39 skrev Lars Ingebrigtsen : > Writing code is always better for programmers, but non-programmers can > put together format-spec things easier. Maybe, but why don't we first try to make an effort so that they don't = have to. There is a tower of convenience for the typical user: 1. accept the default 2. customise-variable, picking another ready-made format 3. download an ELPA package (or copy someone's init.el) 4. write Lisp A format-spec elaboration would fit somewhere between 3 and 4 in that = tower -- easier than Lisp, but less convenient than using something = available. (Maybe you would place it above 3, but then I personally rank = "Lisp" at around 1.001. We aren't typical users.) Thus let's attack 1 and 2 first. If we fail, and it is clear that a = significant number of users would legitimately be dissatisfied by = options 1..4 above, then format-spec may be an option. >> 3. As any designer knows, customisability is a cop-out: it's an >> abdication of responsibility. The user can now conveniently be blamed >> for any perceived shortcoming. Conversely, being forced to think and >> make hard choices is much of what design is about, and users like = when >> it's done for them in a competent way. >=20 > I know what you mean, but of course I want to have a good default. And I know that you do! What about the new format -- is it good enough = for you, or can you help making it better? > I just doubt that there's any point in adding more than one "standard > format" -- people that want to tweak stuff like this really wants to > tweak stuff like this. No they don't, unless we tell them that they may want to. (This is an = often ignored back-side of customisation!) I've only heard rather reasonable comments about specific shortcomings = such as the lack of Unicode names. Let's fix that first. > Trying to figure out all formats a user might > want is futile (and ultimately user-hostile). Correct, but that was never the the idea. We only need to provide the = minimum number of ones to make most users happy. (I should add at this point that users typically don't know exactly what = they want, but they occasionally do know what they don't. This actually = makes the job of the designer easier.) The ideal number of options is always one, but I went with two for a = very specific reason: the 'traditional' option is a time-saver. Not for = users, but for you and me, who can point to it if there is a complaint = about the change. I'd rather not have it.