From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Unify mark-foo commands Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 05:46:44 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <200202141246.g1ECkis09384@aztec.santafe.edu> References: <200202110209.g1B29El06573@aztec.santafe.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1013691657 4021 195.204.10.66 (14 Feb 2002 13:00:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Feb 2002 13:00:57 GMT Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby2.netfonds.no with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16bLVQ-00012l-00 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 14:00:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16bLKD-0007Wl-00; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 07:49:21 -0500 Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16bLHh-0007HS-00; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 07:46:45 -0500 Original-Received: from aztec.santafe.edu (aztec [192.12.12.49]) by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id g1ECkiu24202; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 05:46:44 -0700 (MST) Original-Received: (from rms@localhost) by aztec.santafe.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.9.3) id g1ECkis09384; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 05:46:44 -0700 (MST) X-Authentication-Warning: aztec.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@aztec using -f Original-To: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE In-reply-to: (Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: quimby.gnus.org gmane.emacs.devel:1135 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1135 * Doing C-M-SPC multiple times pushes multiple marks on the mark ring. But maybe the user expects C-M-SPC C-M-SPC to only put one mark on the mark ring, like C-u 2 C-M-SPC would have done? Definitely it should put only one mark on. * If mark-page is called with an argument, it doesn't mark more pages. Instead, it marks _other_ pages. I didn't change that command, as Good. That command is not in the same class. mark-paragraph and mark-defun should not be changed either. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel