From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Documentation of transient-mark-mode is sloppy, wrong, and confused. Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 12:29:27 +0000 Message-ID: <20090528122927.GA2175@muc.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1243513795 3880 80.91.229.12 (28 May 2009 12:29:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 12:29:55 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu May 28 14:29:52 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1M9ejx-0002Cb-Qf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 14:29:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39111 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M9ejw-0000Vi-LP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 08:29:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M9ej0-00009W-Cw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 08:28:46 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M9eiu-00007h-3V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 08:28:45 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47956 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M9eir-00007U-GL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 08:28:38 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:4816 helo=mail.muc.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M9eiq-0003gG-TD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 08:28:37 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 51485 invoked by uid 3782); 28 May 2009 12:28:33 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (pD9E22736.dip.t-dialin.net [217.226.39.54]) by colin2.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Thu, 28 May 2009 14:28:31 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 20473 invoked by uid 1000); 28 May 2009 12:29:27 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.5 (Fettercairn) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: FreeBSD 4.6-4.9 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:111144 Archived-At: Hi, Emacs! The description in the Emacs manual of Transient Mark Mode and related topics falls somewhat short of being adequate. In particular: On page "Mark": (i) There are no @dfn{active}, @dfn{active mark}, @dfn{active region}. o - My suggestion: "The region is termed @dfn{active} when it is highlighted. The mark is @dfn{active} whenever the region is active. This usage of ``active'' is largely historical, originating from the time when region commands were disabled when the region wasn't highlighted." (BTW: what is the correct past participle of "highlight"? Is it "highlighted" or "highlit"?) (ii) "If the mark is active, the region always extends between point and the mark," is gibberish. Does the region only sometimes extend between point and mark in other circumstances? (iii) There is confusion here as to whether a region continues to exist when it is "inactive". My personal view is that the region comes into existence when the mark is first set, and both continue existing until the buffer is killed, regardless of whether they happen to be "active" at any particular time. (iii) "The text between point and the mark is called \"the region\"", coupled with "The region persists only until you use it" implies that this text no longer "persists" after the region is "used". This sort of suggests that "using" a region kills the text in it. At any rate, this bit of manual gives a very sloppy impression, even if it does have a coherent meaning. (iv) "The mark is automatically \"deactivated\" after certain non-motion commands, including any command that changes the text in the buffer." appears to be false. (It's not possible to be definite here without knowing exactly what "active" means.) At any rate, when the region is not highlit, C-w works. (This is due to the default setting of the perplexingly named `mark-even-if-inactive'; I think this variable should be renamed to `allow-commands-on-inactive-region'.) On page "Persistent Mark": (v) The page title "Persistent Marks" is stupid. Marks ARE persistent (see (iii) above) (unless you're talking about the ones which were superseded by euros in 2001). This page should be renamed "Transient Mark Mode", or perhaps "Disabling Transient Mark Mode". This comment also applies to most of the uses of "persistent" in this page. (vi) "By default, the region is highlighted whenever it exists, and disappears once you use it or explicitly deactivate the mark.". This is untrue, or at best horribly confused. (See (iii) above). What does it mean to say that a region "disappears"? Given the given @dfn{region} (see (iii)), "disappears" can only mean "is killed", which is absurd. (vii) This page fails explicitly to state the essence of deactivated transient mark mode, namely that the region isn't highlit. Or, rather it mentions it only in the small print section, which nobody reads unless desperate. (viii) "When Transient Mark mode is off, the mark is persistent: it is _never_ deactivated, but can be set to different locations using commands such as `C-'. After the first time you set the mark in a buffer, there is always a region in that buffer." is horribly confusing. o - This paragraph seems to hold, regardless of whether t-m-m is enabled, hence doesn't belong on this page. Maybe. o - If an @dfn{active} region means a highlighted one (as I suggest above), then with disabled t-m-m, the region is NEVER ACTIVE, not "always active". (ix) Etc. There're more things sloppy in this page, but this email is already long enough. ######################################################################### Additionally, there appears to be a conspiracy to marginalise the classical Emacs mark handling. Surely discussion of this belongs in the main "Mark" page, not hidden in some misnamed subsidiary page. I would be prepared to make this change myself. Other than that, the best way to fix all these faults, I believe, is to replace all occurances of the ridiculous phrases "active region" and "active mark" by the accurate "highlit region" (or "highlighted region"), after which the absurdities will pretty much resolve themselves. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).