bug#71172: Info: Fixing Case: mention both ways

bug#71172: Info: Fixing Case: mention both ways

[Dan Jacobson]

On (info "(emacs) Fixing Case") be sure to mention the other way too!:
< ‘M-- M-l’
> ‘M-- M-l’ (or 'M-b M-l')
< ‘M-- M-u’
> ‘M-- M-u’ (or 'M-b M-u')
< ‘M-- M-c’
> ‘M-- M-c’ (or 'M-b M-c')

bug#71172: Info: Fixing Case: mention both ways

[Eli Zaretskii]

tags 71172 notabug wontfix
close 71172
thanks

> From: Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
> Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 09:55:53 +0800
> 
> On (info "(emacs) Fixing Case") be sure to mention the other way too!:
> < ‘M-- M-l’
> > ‘M-- M-l’ (or 'M-b M-l')
> < ‘M-- M-u’
> > ‘M-- M-u’ (or 'M-b M-u')
> < ‘M-- M-c’
> > ‘M-- M-c’ (or 'M-b M-c')

Why?  The point of M-- is that you do NOT need to go backwards, as
with other editors.  With the above logic, we'd also need to document
that

    C-M-r \b M-c
and
    C-M-r \< M-c
and
    C-M-r \Sw M-c

and gazillion other ways, are _also_ the way of fixing the case of
word before point.  To say nothing of the fact that "M-- M-c"
guarantees that point will remain where it was (so you can safely keep
typing afterwards), whereas all the other methods above do not.  E.g.,
try your M-b method when there's one or more SPC characters between
point and the end of the previous word.

The Emacs manual shows the recommended most convenient and correct
practices.  It doesn't (and should NOT) show all of the possible ways,
let alone complex and inconvenient onces.

So I don't think we should do what you suggest, and I'm therefore
closing this bug.

bug#71172: Info: Fixing Case: mention both ways

[Dan Jacobson]

On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 03:45:13PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > ‘M-- M-c’ (or 'M-b M-c')
>
> Why?  The point of M-- is that you do NOT need to go backwards, as
> with other editors.  With the above logic, we'd also need to document

Well, OK. I was just thinking "b" was a little closer to hit on the keyboard than "-".