From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#12443: 24.2.50; Default values in the minibuffer prompt (fix inconsisntecy) Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:41:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1347651737 10396 80.91.229.3 (14 Sep 2012 19:42:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:42:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 12443@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dani Moncayo Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 14 21:42:21 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TCbmO-0007su-Am for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 21:42:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50768 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TCbmK-0004Qc-8C for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:42:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58478) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TCbmF-0004QT-8k for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:42:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TCbm8-0007B8-3k for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:42:10 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:52888) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TCbm8-0007Ax-0g for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:42:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TCbn4-00025P-JN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:43:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:43:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 12443 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 12443-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B12443.13476517717994 (code B ref 12443); Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:43:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 12443) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Sep 2012 19:42:51 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34200 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TCbmt-00024r-1N for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:42:51 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:59359) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TCbmq-00024k-TM for 12443@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:42:49 -0400 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q8EJfnqr022230; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:41:49 -0400 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 9324CB4071; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:41:49 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Dani Moncayo's message of "Fri, 14 Sep 2012 21:10:12 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:64312 Archived-At: >>> I see no reason for this inconsistency, >> Agreed. The officially sanctioned behavior is to use "(default ...)". > Then all commands should be consistent on that. Agreed. > (Anyway, I don't understand why the way of formatting the default > value in the prompt string should make the job of this mode harder, > because if we know what the default value is and how is formatted in > the prompt string, it should be trivial to identify that part at the > right side of the prompt string. Maybe I'm missing something...) The problem is that we don't always know how it is formatted in the prompt (it might be a shortened version, for example). > Thanks, but if we agree that there is a problem here (or there is room > for improvement), it would be better to fix this in the vanilla Emacs. It's a matter of taste (some people prefer the "(default ...)"). Stefan