From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ergus Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Changes for emacs 28 Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 23:17:09 +0200 Message-ID: <20200911211709.v2o6mbbhb6oz4o3b@Ergus> References: <83mu1whac7.fsf@gnu.org> <83imckh9yt.fsf@gnu.org> <83ft7oh63h.fsf@gnu.org> <20200911121919.5oljwsot4g3bm7zq@Ergus> <83a6xwh4o3.fsf@gnu.org> <20200911125744.x7at74mr4dyrcktf@Ergus> <83zh5wfor3.fsf@gnu.org> <92d20285-2141-2ef3-da09-432aeb3ecec4@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="8516"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , rekado@elephly.net, ghe@sdf.org, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 11 23:18:16 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kGqQy-00027w-NO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 23:18:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48260 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kGqQx-0007v2-Ou for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 17:18:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39534) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kGqQ4-0007Ue-Mz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 17:17:20 -0400 Original-Received: from sonic308-2.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com ([74.6.130.41]:38234) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kGqQ2-0007SA-9h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 17:17:20 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aol.com; s=a2048; t=1599859036; bh=48e0YWpUmL3Veo2oVWIudNFeyF7kDF4uetLUZo/0thQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=lpaiCfeHyXRg6O1xBX+W4GuHRHhffvyVgqb2kEfj7WWmHH/c+7Q18Y4gS0195im4BBfxm4Ggg0aPPoRrIJFk6bK3Cq7vL03QN1uPKIUnNHeM//oIaz/i/OTHGVqFXux8siU+vfEY8ZEnLuwti2hV9tt41Xo2z96/TxO8JXDzr0bbyagz8OIQXCLCBH+cNXjxDGf7nJhsjd2LlUEvigrJePHEnaMzh2pKU0XYbh1base4p7IlbfEE3u/5RNJLa594RLyxifR4dzzAh2KZlAcOTg5ou3+u2QyphE0ujM06WrptoaQD/rbG3OOTif29rF1UKK17LedpRY4IKpxd2ld7gg== X-YMail-OSG: VjdB9SEVM1m40S1RJxEl0rKQFGaZfiMviBl5OnpozQgwj_XRp.w9hmeVZ2v4jSl PW18Zv1IaafQrSFHq8CdhHQ66u4oKRQrQu_JW_3tenSpsOfdZ6BA8KUUz0bmdJ6O.2QIZe0iphxV MazDzOg8rJmjAeAkgDz31HDX8L.8MhCzQpxOvX0Wc6PHM7DEmOIp1WuWxaG3cUwRkr.7orruU74T sCSMdeijIOpT4X6sbmfMMswkVSV2MfDLUZJmbuUjuxNc_ALYRDzwseILbHwIUOOJabU7GjYuP66s 2wXbXtmBHq0db.DszfivFV7R50lOEt.THb803GyKJmB4.irqyqnuSsxfl8nnw3l1LiW70i539D_b asJZ.p8px8c6G_lAbCkmtRtKL9j_QZdw5ppbgxBFGu9KIYJ50DRYMw6nNV_hzXDsMByrMUVCHy1y 9HeO.STXNOAgFIR_8KInwODEocEhblpTHBleKUklIrLd0WJesZe0BsX9J7f_.am4QR51n.180hnv .2r6UfjTZk0zddFb2UdqBj3Q9v3dyiyobzbSd525InM.9bg0tNl5cfJgewhz_Qxivl8nef3jRDmP JYAPu9vy_QhUckNpu7gLYK9MpF1Hw9viCNCattg4a263IBrfLZk2GN1vVys3WgbwtUYHB364Ly0H AiLm3GVCVV5Wb5pCU518tQG5k5bruStXROYzzy2cNIjt_4yXFaPrxn2azCI7SxXQhz0I8.V6MkOD Q46_H7Nr_oGczkpQ9sbxdqkrcHIzWE2hzLkHQuUk8dez5g3xm8vAWNkSuyjPDG2VucM5A5m5wjz7 hFU5gieVb7FFiI7QrEvJZIiUuekWNq7aZ6w_lt1kd9 Original-Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic308.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 21:17:16 +0000 Original-Received: by smtp401.mail.ir2.yahoo.com (VZM Hermes SMTP Server) with ESMTPA ID dbb683eef6daaf46074e0975d0ece0a4; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 21:17:14 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <92d20285-2141-2ef3-da09-432aeb3ecec4@yandex.ru> X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.16583 mail.backend.jedi.jws.acl:role.jedi.acl.token.atz.jws.hermes.aol Apache-HttpAsyncClient/4.1.4 (Java/11.0.7) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=74.6.130.41; envelope-from=spacibba@aol.com; helo=sonic308-2.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/11 17:17:16 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:255244 Archived-At: On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 12:00:48AM +0300, Dmitry Gutov wrote: >On 11.09.2020 16:04, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>>Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 14:57:44 +0200 >>>From: Ergus >>>Cc: rekado@elephly.net, ghe@sdf.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, >>> drew.adams@oracle.com, dgutov@yandex.ru >>> >>>The mode will substitute undo with undo-only. This small contradiction >>>will start a war here. >> >>As long as we keep this on the menu and the tool bar, there will be no >>reason for a "war". > >So there will be contradiction between the menu and the keyboard? > Hopefully not: With the undo-redo-mode; undo icon will do undo-only as well as the keyboard and toolbar-icon. Otherwise; maybe it is easier to keep everything there as now (undo and redo in toolbar and menubar and no undo-redo-mode) but add an option like default-undo-command to set the undo-only as the default undo either in the keyboard, toolbar and menubar if someone (like me) don't like at all the default undo. I don't know if that's possible with a simple remap... is it? BTW: everybody agrees in set undo-redo to C-? and M-_?? >>>>>Having undo with an undo-redo in the same "state" could be confusing as >>>>>the normal undo could do also redo IMO. >>>> >>>>If the user uses the menus or the tool bar, the confusion will be >>>>spared, right? >>>> >>>If the user expects undo-only behavior; then having our undo will be >>>confusing because not expecting undo becoming a redo at some point. >> >>How can it be confusing that 2 different commands produce different >>results? Why isn't it confusing today, when we already have these 2 >>commands? > >The menu item doesn't exactly say which command it is invoking. > >>>IMO we should have one (undo) or the other (undo-only + undo-edor) but >>>not mix them by default. >> >>Whether to mix them or not is up to the user. > >This has been true before the menu items were added, and will continue >to be true if/when we change the default bindings. > >So I think that statement is missing the point: we should endeavor for >predictable and consistent sets of menu items, key bindings, and other >features. > Personally I still think that a mode is better. But I trust more in Eli's opinion than mine in this topics.