From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: skeleton.el _ versus @ Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 20:33:29 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <200304020133.h321XTkK023712@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: <200303242005.h2OK57gr013285@rum.cs.yale.edu> <1048554010.20622.66.camel@zircon> <200303311740.h2VHeZNG017518@rum.cs.yale.edu> <1049242082.66437.15.camel@zircon> <200304020020.h320K4de023432@rum.cs.yale.edu> <1049245381.66437.33.camel@zircon> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1049247323 30460 80.91.224.249 (2 Apr 2003 01:35:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 01:35:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 02 03:35:22 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 190X9u-0007v9-00 for ; Wed, 02 Apr 2003 03:35:22 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 190XAk-0000YS-00 for ; Wed, 02 Apr 2003 03:36:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 190X9E-00041d-05 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2003 20:34:40 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 190X8d-00030D-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2003 20:34:03 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 190X8U-0002Ww-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2003 20:33:55 -0500 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.10.13) id 190X87-0001oT-00; Tue, 01 Apr 2003 20:33:31 -0500 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h321XTx6023714; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 20:33:29 -0500 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h321XTkK023712; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 20:33:29 -0500 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Joe Kelsey Original-cc: occitan@esperanto.org Original-cc: Richard Stallman Original-cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:12823 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:12823 > It seems clear to me that the "backing-up" of _ with @ was an > ill-conceived back-of-the-hand programming insertion to solve someone's > region-mode problem. It clearly was ill-thought out because it > completely fails in normal insertion mode when you mix @ and _, as > mmm-mode does. Could ou give an real example where it "completely fails" ? I understand that the behavior is different, but your previous example is not very compelling since the difference is only an "off by one" position. > I can imagine that a solution is to have skeleton-insert examine the use > made of @ and _ ex-post-facto. No. The two different situations can only be told apart by asking the author. In (nil "fun " str "(" @ ")" \n "{" \n _ "}"), point should always end inside the parens. > When you look at the design of skeleton-mode, _ is clearly the preferred > way to set skeleton-point. I really just cannot see how to justify > completely abandoning the meaning of _ in any situation at all. I can _ indicates where to insert the region(s). > perversion of the clear separation between _ and @. My question is when > was the _ @ distinction ruined by allowing @ to override the meaning of _. In Emacs-21.1. > Was it introduced by the original skeleton author, or was it > inserted on-the-sly by someone else? It was introduced by yours truly. The reasoning behind it was that editing generally takes place left-to-right, so point should most naturally end up at the first interesting position. Also it allowed to distinguish between where point should go and where the region should go. Stefan