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: Re: draft for DEL key poll Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:54:30 +0000 Message-ID: <20110928075430.GA2337@acm.acm> References: <87litcvtu2.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87r532n6wr.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317196739 23379 80.91.229.12 (28 Sep 2011 07:58:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:58:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 28 09:58:52 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R8p2Z-0004pa-TQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:58:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36476 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8p2Z-0000jl-HN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 03:58:51 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:57299) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8p2X-0000jU-5Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 03:58:50 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8p2S-0000ao-BX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 03:58:49 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:55860 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8p2R-0000aF-RH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 03:58:44 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 75706 invoked by uid 3782); 28 Sep 2011 07:58:42 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (pD9519AA4.dip.t-dialin.net [217.81.154.164]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:58:40 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 2403 invoked by uid 1000); 28 Sep 2011 07:54:30 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87r532n6wr.fsf@stupidchicken.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 193.149.48.1 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:144435 Archived-At: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 08:52:20PM -0400, Chong Yidong wrote: > Richard Stallman writes: > > In Emacs 24, now in pretest, a change is being considered for DEL > > (often the Backspace key) and the Delete function key. When there is > > an active region, they would delete the region instead of just one > > character. This is enabled by default in the current pretest, so > > building and using the pretest is a way to test it. > This description fails to explain the underlying logic behind the > change. > If an active region is made with the mouse, and with shift-selection, > the DEL key deletes it. This behavior is non-negotiable as a default, > as it is the standard behavior of graphical applications on modern GUI > platforms and there is no good reason for Emacs to violate it. There are several good reasons, otherwise Richard wouldn't be initiating a poll about it. I sincerely hope we won't be introducing too many more behaviours which are "standard" in modern GUIs. > Some Emacs commands perform a certain operation on the region when it is > active. In general, this "act on region" behavior does not draw a > distinction between a region made with the mouse (or shift-selection) > and a region made "normally" (e.g. by C-SPC followed by point motion). > In previous Emacs releases, a special exception was made for the DEL and > delete keys. This exception has now been dropped. I cannot let you get away with this epistemological conflation. These other commands do not act _ON_ the region. They act _IN_ the region. I.e., they do their normal thing in a portion of the buffer. You've utterly changed the meaning of `delete-character-forward', making it act ON a region rather than on a character. The behaviour of DEL and delete was not previously an exception - they did their normal thing at the boundary of the region. > Anyone who argues that DEL ought not to delete a "normal" active region > should provide a convincing explanation of why DEL should be treated > differently from other Emacs commands that act on active regions. See above. DEL should keep its normal meaning in the presence of a region, just like most other commands do. As a matter of interest, in the proposed default configuration, how does one delete a single character at a boundary of an "active" region? -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).