From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: delete-selection-mode as default Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 19:15:06 +0000 Message-ID: <20180918191506.GA4848@ACM> References: <835zz5ie17.fsf@gnu.org> <87musg0wyf.fsf@toy.adminart.net> <83va73f0mv.fsf@gnu.org> <83musegaf2.fsf@gnu.org> <3f242636-6fa4-4e36-a37b-86f1d7088aae@default> <83h8img39b.fsf@gnu.org> <83d0tafykb.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1537298254 19727 195.159.176.226 (18 Sep 2018 19:17:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 19:17:34 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Cc: hw@adminart.net, spacibba@aol.com, joostkremers@fastmail.fm, npostavs@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, yurivkhan@gmail.com, phillip.lord@russet.org.uk To: Eli Zaretskii , Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 18 21:17:29 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g2LV3-00051R-5G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 21:17:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42237 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g2LX9-0005Zs-GM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:19:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37903) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g2LWS-0005Zn-UU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:18:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g2LWP-0008NZ-JT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:18:56 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:34519 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g2LWP-0008HI-87 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:18:53 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 52712 invoked by uid 3782); 18 Sep 2018 19:18:50 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p5B14753D.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [91.20.117.61]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 21:18:49 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 5156 invoked by uid 1000); 18 Sep 2018 19:15:06 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83d0tafykb.fsf@gnu.org> X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 193.149.48.1 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:229952 Archived-At: Hello, Eli and Drew. On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 21:30:28 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 10:42:21 -0700 (PDT) > > From: Drew Adams > > Cc: yurivkhan@gmail.com, hw@adminart.net, spacibba@aol.com, > > joostkremers@fastmail.fm, npostavs@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, > > acm@muc.de, phillip.lord@russet.org.uk > > > > What's the real use case for such temporary enabling/disabling of d-s-m? > > > > And how is it different from just, well, enabling/disabling d-s-m? > > > People who are against turning on delete-selection-mode presented > > > several such use cases. > > I don't think so. I think you just postulated it, without any example. > > Did someone who is against using d-s-m actually say that s?he > > wanted to use it temporarily (and without turning d-s-m on, > > whatever that means)? > > But I could be wrong - it's a long thread. Feel free to point us to > > some mention by someone of such a use case. Or if that's not > > possible, please remind us of (describe) such a case. > Look for messages from Alan and Richard. I cannot afford searching > for them, life is too short. I think you mean the following reply to me, which I quote in full for Drew's benefit: ************************************************************************* Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2018 13:56:27 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii To: Alan Mackenzie CC: drew.adams@oracle.com, yurivkhan@gmail.com, hw@adminart.net, spacibba@aol.com, joostkremers@fastmail.fm, npostavs@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, phillip.lord@russet.org.uk Subject: Re: delete-selection-mode as default X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e > Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2018 10:20:16 +0000 > Cc: Drew Adams , yurivkhan@gmail.com, > hw@adminart.net, > spacibba@aol.com, joostkremers@fastmail.fm, npostavs@gmail.com, > emacs-devel@gnu.org, phillip.lord@russet.org.uk > From: Alan Mackenzie > > I can't help feeling that this isn't the right approach. I feel that > it > will increase complexity which the new features won't justify. I know > I'm speaking as an "extremist" (i.e. no transient-mark-mode at all) > here, > but still: I think having to press a key sequence before d-s-m would > work > would take the purpose of d-s-m away - that key sequence might as well > be > C-w. People who want delete-selection-mode enabled by default won't need to type that additional key, because for them the region will already have the correct state. delete-selection-mode will take care of that. It is those who do NO want delete-selection-mode turned on by default, people like you and me, who will be ABLE to use delete-selection-mode by typing an extra key. Those users will also be capable of "activating" and "deactivating" the region like transient-mark-mode does with a single command, thus allowing them to invoke commands that act on an "active" region without turning on transient-mark-mode globally. > You seem to be proposing to associate a three-value state with the > region, which state users could change with key sequences. I can see > this being more confusing than the current two-value state (or is it > 2.5?) we currently have. It cannot be more confusing, because for those who already turn on transient-mark-mode and/or delete-selection-mode it leaves the matters exactly like they are. It actually should _improve_ on that by letting those users temporarily turn on/off those modes for the purposes of processing a given region by one or more commands. > It might well be that, having introduced transient-mark-mode as a > default, a certain degree of confusion in Emacs is unavoidable. If so, > does it make sense to spend a lot of effort which might merely switch > the > confusion to somewhere else? Assuming that we'd want to have options > to > retain all the "old" behaviour, I think it would be difficult to avoid > increasing the confusion. I hope you will now reconsider this remark. > I've interacted somewhat with hw, who's been driving this thread, and > come to the conclusion that he doesn't really want to use Emacs. That's irrelevant for the purposes of my proposal. I do want to use Emacs, and so I hope do you. ************************************************************************* And yes, Eli, I do want to use Emacs, very much so! I remain genuinely sceptical about the ideas for en/disabling delete-selection-mode. I'm convinced neither that they're a good idea, nor a bad idea. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).