* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
@ 2013-01-22 0:53 Xue Fuqiao
2013-01-22 3:19 ` Glenn Morris
2013-01-22 14:59 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Xue Fuqiao @ 2013-01-22 0:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 13521
The current behavior of `sort-lines' on the empty region is to do
nothing. I often find that I want to sort whole buffers at the time,
and I expect `sort-lines' to do just that, before remembering I have
to mark the whole buffer first.
Wouldn't it be convenient to change the behavior of `sort-lines' so
that it sorts the whole buffer if no region is marked? Or is this
inconsistent with how other region-operating functions works?
See:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2013-01/msg00492.html
--
Best regards, Xue Fuqiao.
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/XueFuqiao
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2013-01-22 0:53 Xue Fuqiao
@ 2013-01-22 3:19 ` Glenn Morris
2013-01-22 3:44 ` Xue Fuqiao
2013-01-22 3:44 ` Xue Fuqiao
2013-01-22 14:59 ` Stefan Monnier
1 sibling, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Glenn Morris @ 2013-01-22 3:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xue Fuqiao; +Cc: 13521
Please wait a week or so before reposting something from one Emacs list
on another, to allow time for people to reply.
Xue Fuqiao wrote:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2013-01/msg00492.html
See the very first reply, posted before this report.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2013-01-22 3:19 ` Glenn Morris
@ 2013-01-22 3:44 ` Xue Fuqiao
2013-01-22 3:44 ` Xue Fuqiao
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Xue Fuqiao @ 2013-01-22 3:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 13521
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 22:19:12 -0500
Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:
> Please wait a week or so before reposting something from one Emacs list
> on another, to allow time for people to reply.
Thanks for your advice.
> Xue Fuqiao wrote:
>
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2013-01/msg00492.html
>
> See the very first reply, posted before this report.
I've seen this reply, but I'd like to report it as a wishlist.
--
Best regards, Xue Fuqiao.
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/XueFuqiao
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2013-01-22 3:19 ` Glenn Morris
2013-01-22 3:44 ` Xue Fuqiao
@ 2013-01-22 3:44 ` Xue Fuqiao
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Xue Fuqiao @ 2013-01-22 3:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 13521
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 22:19:12 -0500
Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:
> Please wait a week or so before reposting something from one Emacs list
> on another, to allow time for people to reply.
Thanks for your advice.
> Xue Fuqiao wrote:
>
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2013-01/msg00492.html
>
> See the very first reply, posted before this report.
I've seen this reply, but I'd like to report it as a wishlist.
--
Best regards, Xue Fuqiao.
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/XueFuqiao
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2013-01-22 0:53 Xue Fuqiao
2013-01-22 3:19 ` Glenn Morris
@ 2013-01-22 14:59 ` Stefan Monnier
2013-01-22 18:19 ` Glenn Morris
1 sibling, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2013-01-22 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xue Fuqiao; +Cc: 13521
> The current behavior of `sort-lines' on the empty region is to do
> nothing.
I think that's the right thing to do.
> I often find that I want to sort whole buffers at the time,
> and I expect `sort-lines' to do just that, before remembering I have
> to mark the whole buffer first.
That seems to be considering a different case: not the case of an empty
region, but the case where there's no active region.
Currently, this case signals an error, but I think I agree it makes
sense to let it apply to the whole buffer if there is no active region.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2013-01-22 14:59 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2013-01-22 18:19 ` Glenn Morris
2013-01-22 19:04 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Glenn Morris @ 2013-01-22 18:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: Xue Fuqiao, 13521
Stefan Monnier wrote:
> That seems to be considering a different case: not the case of an empty
> region, but the case where there's no active region.
> Currently, this case signals an error, but I think I agree it makes
> sense to let it apply to the whole buffer if there is no active region.
flush-lines, keep-lines instead operate on all lines after point.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2013-01-22 18:19 ` Glenn Morris
@ 2013-01-22 19:04 ` Stefan Monnier
2020-08-21 1:18 ` Stefan Kangas
0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2013-01-22 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: Xue Fuqiao, 13521
>> That seems to be considering a different case: not the case of an empty
>> region, but the case where there's no active region.
>> Currently, this case signals an error, but I think I agree it makes
>> sense to let it apply to the whole buffer if there is no active region.
> flush-lines, keep-lines instead operate on all lines after point.
Yes, we have an inconsistency in this respect: some commands use "the
whole buffer" and others use "everything after point". Whichever choice
we make for sort-lines, it will be inconsistent with some of the
existing commands ;-)
I personally prefer the "whole buffer", but whoever makes the change
gets to make the choice.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2013-01-22 19:04 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2020-08-21 1:18 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-08-21 6:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Kangas @ 2020-08-21 1:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: Xue Fuqiao, Glenn Morris, 13521
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 899 bytes --]
tags 13521 + patch
thanks
Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:
>>> That seems to be considering a different case: not the case of an empty
>>> region, but the case where there's no active region.
>>> Currently, this case signals an error, but I think I agree it makes
>>> sense to let it apply to the whole buffer if there is no active region.
>> flush-lines, keep-lines instead operate on all lines after point.
>
> Yes, we have an inconsistency in this respect: some commands use "the
> whole buffer" and others use "everything after point". Whichever choice
> we make for sort-lines, it will be inconsistent with some of the
> existing commands ;-)
>
> I personally prefer the "whole buffer", but whoever makes the change
> gets to make the choice.
The attached patch makes 'sort-lines' sort the entire buffer when there
is no region.
Any comments?
Best regards,
Stefan Kangas
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Make-sort-lines-sort-entire-buffer-without-active-re.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 2693 bytes --]
From 6c1d6eb1dc8306f99fd01ba848213632ac6cd973 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 03:06:16 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Make 'sort-lines' sort entire buffer without active region
* lisp/sort.el (sort-lines): Sort entire buffer if there is no active
region. Doc fix. (Bug#13521)
* test/lisp/sort-tests.el (sort-tests--lines/entire-buffer): New test.
* etc/NEWS: Announce the above change.
---
etc/NEWS | 3 +++
lisp/sort.el | 12 +++++++++++-
test/lisp/sort-tests.el | 6 ++++++
3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/etc/NEWS b/etc/NEWS
index 53391f91f7..1a21525328 100644
--- a/etc/NEWS
+++ b/etc/NEWS
@@ -145,6 +145,9 @@ setting the variable 'auto-save-visited-mode' buffer-locally to nil.
description of the properties. Likewise 'button-describe' does the
same for a button.
+---
+** 'sort-lines' will now sort the entire buffer if there is no region.
+
\f
* Changes in Specialized Modes and Packages in Emacs 28.1
diff --git a/lisp/sort.el b/lisp/sort.el
index f878db24a3..b1cade4266 100644
--- a/lisp/sort.el
+++ b/lisp/sort.el
@@ -200,11 +200,21 @@ sort-reorder-buffer
(defun sort-lines (reverse beg end)
"Sort lines in region alphabetically; REVERSE non-nil means descending order.
Interactively, REVERSE is the prefix argument, and BEG and END are the region.
+If there is no region selected, sort the entire buffer.
+
Called from a program, there are three arguments:
REVERSE (non-nil means reverse order), BEG and END (region to sort).
The variable `sort-fold-case' determines whether alphabetic case affects
the sort order."
- (interactive "P\nr")
+ (interactive
+ (progn
+ (barf-if-buffer-read-only)
+ (list current-prefix-arg nil nil)))
+ (if (and (called-interactively-p 'any) (use-region-p))
+ (setq beg (region-beginning)
+ end (region-end))
+ (setq beg (point-min)
+ end (point-max)))
(save-excursion
(save-restriction
(narrow-to-region beg end)
diff --git a/test/lisp/sort-tests.el b/test/lisp/sort-tests.el
index 21f483a23a..3c6f0a0024 100644
--- a/test/lisp/sort-tests.el
+++ b/test/lisp/sort-tests.el
@@ -78,6 +78,12 @@ sort-tests-test-sorter-function
(ert-deftest sort-tests--lines ()
(sort-tests-test-sorter-function "\n" #'sort-lines))
+(ert-deftest sort-tests--lines/entire-buffer ()
+ (with-temp-buffer
+ (insert "C\nA\nB")
+ (call-interactively #'sort-lines)
+ (should (equal (buffer-string) "A\nB\nC"))))
+
(ert-deftest sort-tests--paragraphs ()
(let ((paragraph-separate "[\s\t\f]*$"))
(sort-tests-test-sorter-function "\n\n" #'sort-paragraphs)))
--
2.28.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2020-08-21 1:18 ` Stefan Kangas
@ 2020-08-21 6:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-08-21 7:15 ` Stefan Kangas
2021-05-10 11:25 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-08-21 6:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Kangas; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, monnier, 13521
> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>
> Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 18:18:34 -0700
> Cc: Xue Fuqiao <xfq.free@gmail.com>, Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>,
> 13521@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> > I personally prefer the "whole buffer", but whoever makes the change
> > gets to make the choice.
>
> The attached patch makes 'sort-lines' sort the entire buffer when there
> is no region.
How frequently did you see a buffer in Emacs with no region in it?
IME, it takes about 2 commands since buffer creation to have a region
in it. So I predict users to be tripped by this feature quite a lot:
they will think there's no region, invoke the command, and get some
arbitrary region sorted. Requiring them to always provide the region
avoids this pitfall, since the user is forced to make sure the region
is where he or she wants it. And marking the whole buffer is just 2
key-presses away.
So I think this change will annoy more than help.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2020-08-21 6:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2020-08-21 7:15 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-08-21 7:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-05-10 11:25 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Kangas @ 2020-08-21 7:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, monnier, 13521
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> The attached patch makes 'sort-lines' sort the entire buffer when there
>> is no region.
>
> How frequently did you see a buffer in Emacs with no region in it?
> IME, it takes about 2 commands since buffer creation to have a region
> in it. So I predict users to be tripped by this feature quite a lot:
> they will think there's no region, invoke the command, and get some
> arbitrary region sorted. Requiring them to always provide the region
> avoids this pitfall, since the user is forced to make sure the region
> is where he or she wants it. And marking the whole buffer is just 2
> key-presses away.
>
> So I think this change will annoy more than help.
Sorry, the correct terminology I should have used is "active region".
This is as tested by `use-region-p'. Compare the test I introduce also
to the one in `flush-lines', where I lifted it from.
Best regards,
Stefan Kangas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2020-08-21 7:15 ` Stefan Kangas
@ 2020-08-21 7:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-09-05 11:13 ` Stefan Kangas
0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-08-21 7:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Kangas; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, monnier, 13521
> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>
> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 00:15:31 -0700
> Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, xfq.free@gmail.com, rgm@gnu.org,
> 13521@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> > How frequently did you see a buffer in Emacs with no region in it?
> > IME, it takes about 2 commands since buffer creation to have a region
> > in it. So I predict users to be tripped by this feature quite a lot:
> > they will think there's no region, invoke the command, and get some
> > arbitrary region sorted. Requiring them to always provide the region
> > avoids this pitfall, since the user is forced to make sure the region
> > is where he or she wants it. And marking the whole buffer is just 2
> > key-presses away.
> >
> > So I think this change will annoy more than help.
>
> Sorry, the correct terminology I should have used is "active region".
> This is as tested by `use-region-p'. Compare the test I introduce also
> to the one in `flush-lines', where I lifted it from.
So if the user has transient-mark-mode disabled (which is what I do),
the command will always sort the entire buffer? Or did I
misunderstand something?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2020-08-21 7:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2020-09-05 11:13 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-09-05 11:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Kangas @ 2020-09-05 11:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, monnier, 13521
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> So if the user has transient-mark-mode disabled (which is what I do),
> the command will always sort the entire buffer? Or did I
> misunderstand something?
I didn't consider that case, but you are correct. The behavior would be
like that documented in `flush-lines':
Interactively, in Transient Mark mode when the mark is active, operate
on the contents of the region. Otherwise, operate from point to the
end of (the accessible portion of) the buffer.
I'm not sure the `flush-lines' behavior makes sense, though. It looks
like you can't run it on a region without transient-mark-mode. So maybe
we should fix that as well.
(Note that `flush-lines' operates from point to point-max, but
`sort-lines' is proposed here to operate on the entire buffer instead as
per previous discussion in this bug.)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2020-09-05 11:13 ` Stefan Kangas
@ 2020-09-05 11:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-09-05 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Kangas; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, monnier, 13521
> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>
> Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2020 11:13:17 +0000
> Cc: xfq.free@gmail.com, rgm@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> 13521@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > So if the user has transient-mark-mode disabled (which is what I do),
> > the command will always sort the entire buffer? Or did I
> > misunderstand something?
>
> I didn't consider that case, but you are correct. The behavior would be
> like that documented in `flush-lines':
>
> Interactively, in Transient Mark mode when the mark is active, operate
> on the contents of the region. Otherwise, operate from point to the
> end of (the accessible portion of) the buffer.
>
> I'm not sure the `flush-lines' behavior makes sense, though. It looks
> like you can't run it on a region without transient-mark-mode. So maybe
> we should fix that as well.
I think we should indeed fix flush-lines as well, yes.
> (Note that `flush-lines' operates from point to point-max, but
> `sort-lines' is proposed here to operate on the entire buffer instead as
> per previous discussion in this bug.)
I guess due to historical reasons?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
[not found] ` <<83imcspim8.fsf@gnu.org>
@ 2020-09-05 14:36 ` Drew Adams
2020-09-05 14:51 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2020-09-05 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii, Stefan Kangas; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, monnier, 13521
> > > So if the user has transient-mark-mode disabled (which is what I do),
> > > the command will always sort the entire buffer? Or did I
> > > misunderstand something?
> >
> > I didn't consider that case, but you are correct. The behavior would be
> > like that documented in `flush-lines':
> >
> > Interactively, in Transient Mark mode when the mark is active, operate
> > on the contents of the region. Otherwise, operate from point to the
> > end of (the accessible portion of) the buffer.
> >
> > I'm not sure the `flush-lines' behavior makes sense, though. It looks
> > like you can't run it on a region without transient-mark-mode. So maybe
> > we should fix that as well.
>
> I think we should indeed fix flush-lines as well, yes.
>
> > (Note that `flush-lines' operates from point to point-max, but
> > `sort-lines' is proposed here to operate on the entire buffer instead as
> > per previous discussion in this bug.)
>
> I guess due to historical reasons?
Apologies for not following this thread and perhaps
misunderstanding at this point.
If `transient-mark-mode' is off then there is no notion
of an "active region". There is just the region.
I doubt that someone who has `transient-mark-mode' off
would ever want commands such as `flush-lines' and
`sort-lines' to act on the region. And if they did, I
expect they'd just narrow to it.
Anything that works on "the active region" is something
that makes sense only when `transient-mark-mode' is on
(IMHO).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2020-09-05 14:36 ` Drew Adams
@ 2020-09-05 14:51 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-09-05 15:34 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-09-05 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, stefan, monnier, 13521
> Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2020 07:36:55 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Cc: xfq.free@gmail.com, rgm@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> 13521@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> I doubt that someone who has `transient-mark-mode' off
> would ever want commands such as `flush-lines' and
> `sort-lines' to act on the region. And if they did, I
> expect they'd just narrow to it.
Please don't doubt, and please don't impose unnecessary commands on
users who have transient-mark-mode off.
> Anything that works on "the active region" is something
> that makes sense only when `transient-mark-mode' is on
> (IMHO).
The important point here is that sort-lines worked on the region, even
if inactive, before the proposed changes, so restricting it now only
to active regions would be a backward-incompatible change of behavior.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
[not found] ` <<83a6y4p98g.fsf@gnu.org>
@ 2020-09-05 15:22 ` Drew Adams
2020-09-05 15:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2020-09-05 15:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii, Drew Adams; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, stefan, monnier, 13521
> > I doubt that someone who has `transient-mark-mode' off
> > would ever want commands such as `flush-lines' and
> > `sort-lines' to act on the region. And if they did, I
> > expect they'd just narrow to it.
>
> Please don't doubt, and please don't impose unnecessary commands on
> users who have transient-mark-mode off.
Please don't claim that I imposed any commands on anyone.
The region is nearly always present and usually nonempty.
A user with `transient-mark-mode' off would typically
(IMHO) be bothered if `flush-lines' started always acting
on the region (it would be almost always: whenever there's
a mark in the buffer and the region is nonempty).
Do you disagree?
> > Anything that works on "the active region" is something
> > that makes sense only when `transient-mark-mode' is on
> > (IMHO).
>
> The important point here is that sort-lines worked on the region, even
> if inactive, before the proposed changes, so restricting it now only
> to active regions would be a backward-incompatible change of behavior.
Yes, sorry; I agree about `sort-lines'. That is not
the case for `flush-lines' and `keep-lines'.
And I think "the important point here" is that a command
that behaves differently when the region is active should
NOT act on the region when `transient-mark-mode' is off.
Why? Because the notion of "active region" applies only
when `transient-mark-mode' is on. Any special behavior
provided only when the region is active is, well, only
for when the region is active. And that's never the case
when `transient-mark-mode' is on.
This was not the case for `sort-lines', as you point out.
It did NOT, and does not, behave differently when the
region is active from when it is inactive.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2020-09-05 14:51 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2020-09-05 15:34 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2020-09-05 15:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, stefan, 13521
> The important point here is that sort-lines worked on the region, even
> if inactive, before the proposed changes, so restricting it now only
> to active regions would be a backward-incompatible change of behavior.
Indeed, so the patch should check something like
(if (or (null transient-mark-mode) (use-region-p))
(list (region-beginning) (region-end))
(list (point-min) (point-max)))
`use-region-p` checks `transient-mark-mode` the other way, because it's
used mostly for commands which previously did *not* operate on the
region, unlike `sort-lines`.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2020-09-05 15:22 ` bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region Drew Adams
@ 2020-09-05 15:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-09-05 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, stefan, monnier, 13521
> Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2020 08:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Cc: stefan@marxist.se, xfq.free@gmail.com, rgm@gnu.org,
> monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 13521@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> > > I doubt that someone who has `transient-mark-mode' off
> > > would ever want commands such as `flush-lines' and
> > > `sort-lines' to act on the region. And if they did, I
> > > expect they'd just narrow to it.
> >
> > Please don't doubt, and please don't impose unnecessary commands on
> > users who have transient-mark-mode off.
>
> Please don't claim that I imposed any commands on anyone.
You expected them to narrow the buffer. That takes additional
commands.
> The region is nearly always present and usually nonempty.
> A user with `transient-mark-mode' off would typically
> (IMHO) be bothered if `flush-lines' started always acting
> on the region (it would be almost always: whenever there's
> a mark in the buffer and the region is nonempty).
So maybe flush-lines needs a separate solution, or none at all. This
bug is about sort-lines, so flush-lines is a tangent.
> And I think "the important point here" is that a command
> that behaves differently when the region is active should
> NOT act on the region when `transient-mark-mode' is off.
That's not really relevant here. We are talking about commands which
by virtue of their 'interactive' spec work on the region. Such
commands shouldn't depend on the region being active.
> This was not the case for `sort-lines', as you point out.
> It did NOT, and does not, behave differently when the
> region is active from when it is inactive.
The proposed change would have made it behave differently, which is
why I've pointed that out.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
[not found] ` <<837dt8p74z.fsf@gnu.org>
@ 2020-09-05 15:46 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2020-09-05 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii, Drew Adams; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, stefan, monnier, 13521
> > > > I doubt that someone who has `transient-mark-mode' off
> > > > would ever want commands such as `flush-lines' and
> > > > `sort-lines' to act on the region. And if they did, I
> > > > expect they'd just narrow to it.
> > >
> > > Please don't doubt, and please don't impose unnecessary commands on
> > > users who have transient-mark-mode off.
> >
> > Please don't claim that I imposed any commands on anyone.
>
> You expected them to narrow the buffer. That takes additional
> commands.
I do expect that, for `flush-lines', which is what I
was thinking of. You correctly pointed out that
`sort-lines' is different.
> > The region is nearly always present and usually nonempty.
> > A user with `transient-mark-mode' off would typically
> > (IMHO) be bothered if `flush-lines' started always acting
> > on the region (it would be almost always: whenever there's
> > a mark in the buffer and the region is nonempty).
>
> So maybe flush-lines needs a separate solution, or none at all. This
> bug is about sort-lines, so flush-lines is a tangent.
I didn't introduce `flush-lines' into the thread.
But yes, the subject line says `sort-lines', and
`flush-lines' is a very different case.
> > And I think "the important point here" is that a command
> > that behaves differently when the region is active should
> > NOT act on the region when `transient-mark-mode' is off.
>
> That's not really relevant here. We are talking about commands which
> by virtue of their 'interactive' spec work on the region. Such
> commands shouldn't depend on the region being active.
Yes, if this is only about commands like `sort-lines'.
Introducing `flush-lines' here was apparently a mistake,
which muddied the waters.
> > This was not the case for `sort-lines', as you point out.
> > It did NOT, and does not, behave differently when the
> > region is active from when it is inactive.
>
> The proposed change would have made it behave differently, which is
> why I've pointed that out.
Good. Agreed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region
2020-08-21 6:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-08-21 7:15 ` Stefan Kangas
@ 2021-05-10 11:25 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-05-10 11:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: xfq.free, rgm, Stefan Kangas, monnier, 13521
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> So I think this change will annoy more than help.
I agree -- I don't think we should change how `sort-lines' works here.
The current behaviour makes sense to me (and changing it sounds like it
might lead to people messing up their buffers), even if there are other
commands that do a DWIM-ish thing in this use case.
So I'm closing this bug report.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-05-10 11:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <<<20130122085354.75ced82538551655e724e0ea@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<<jwvobgh2rkw.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<i2ehhdaxnq.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<jwv1udd2gab.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<CADwFkm=SDc3obOA_KXvtWOBRay+aWtnOtkKX5SGPwXGVB=+hYg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<<83mu2objro.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<CADwFkmnf6ch6CBN13opEWDVnZYY-TaT236xg21Qg2KjWuUVz+w@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<<83imdcbgc5.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<CADwFkm=V7cUz2_5Xr8=k6EZbFK96pJu8wpo6uAA+H7ABDYdH0w@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<<83imcspim8.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<3aad96d8-2503-40e8-b684-8ed18a089083@default>
[not found] ` <<83a6y4p98g.fsf@gnu.org>
2020-09-05 15:22 ` bug#13521: `sort-lines' on the empty region Drew Adams
2020-09-05 15:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
[not found] <<<<20130122085354.75ced82538551655e724e0ea@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<<<jwvobgh2rkw.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<<i2ehhdaxnq.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<<jwv1udd2gab.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<<CADwFkm=SDc3obOA_KXvtWOBRay+aWtnOtkKX5SGPwXGVB=+hYg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<<<83mu2objro.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<<CADwFkmnf6ch6CBN13opEWDVnZYY-TaT236xg21Qg2KjWuUVz+w@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<<<83imdcbgc5.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<<CADwFkm=V7cUz2_5Xr8=k6EZbFK96pJu8wpo6uAA+H7ABDYdH0w@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<<<83imcspim8.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<<3aad96d8-2503-40e8-b684-8ed18a089083@default>
[not found] ` <<<83a6y4p98g.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<7cfc062e-05b2-43f1-8714-19ebd955b88c@default>
[not found] ` <<837dt8p74z.fsf@gnu.org>
2020-09-05 15:46 ` Drew Adams
[not found] <<20130122085354.75ced82538551655e724e0ea@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<jwvobgh2rkw.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<i2ehhdaxnq.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<jwv1udd2gab.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<CADwFkm=SDc3obOA_KXvtWOBRay+aWtnOtkKX5SGPwXGVB=+hYg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<83mu2objro.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<CADwFkmnf6ch6CBN13opEWDVnZYY-TaT236xg21Qg2KjWuUVz+w@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<83imdcbgc5.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<CADwFkm=V7cUz2_5Xr8=k6EZbFK96pJu8wpo6uAA+H7ABDYdH0w@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <<83imcspim8.fsf@gnu.org>
2020-09-05 14:36 ` Drew Adams
2020-09-05 14:51 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-09-05 15:34 ` Stefan Monnier
2013-01-22 0:53 Xue Fuqiao
2013-01-22 3:19 ` Glenn Morris
2013-01-22 3:44 ` Xue Fuqiao
2013-01-22 3:44 ` Xue Fuqiao
2013-01-22 14:59 ` Stefan Monnier
2013-01-22 18:19 ` Glenn Morris
2013-01-22 19:04 ` Stefan Monnier
2020-08-21 1:18 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-08-21 6:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-08-21 7:15 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-08-21 7:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-09-05 11:13 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-09-05 11:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-05-10 11:25 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).