From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Enabling Transient Mark Mode by default Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 00:24:33 +0100 Message-ID: <47BE0831.5050600@gmail.com> References: <87myq4saw1.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <20080219190127.GA1106@muc.de> <877ih0o9dx.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <85ablvftqe.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <8e24944a0802201130y1601cd6dvf22a8089e2de97f7@mail.gmail.com> <858x1fe6fc.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <8e24944a0802201241o4a2a70d0xb823b3fa27692bfd@mail.gmail.com> <87zltujk8n.fsf@jurta.org> <47BE02DE.2010006@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1203650286 14280 80.91.229.12 (22 Feb 2008 03:18:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 03:18:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, wilde@sha-bang.de, David De La Harpe Golden , emacs-devel@gnu.org, Juri Linkov , dann@ics.uci.edu, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, storm@cua.dk, acm@muc.de, miles@gnu.org To: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 22 04:18:29 2008 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 1JSOQd-00041L-V3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 04:18:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JSOQ8-0004c2-P6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:17:56 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JSKmv-0004n7-8u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:25:13 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JSKmu-0004mr-RS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:25:12 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JSKmu-0004mm-Ii for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:25:12 -0500 Original-Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.213]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JSKmj-0001KN-IC; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:25:02 -0500 Original-Received: from c83-254-148-228.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.148.228]:61677 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JSKmf-0004Ki-7R; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 00:24:57 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: <47BE02DE.2010006@gmail.com> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080221-0, 2008-02-21), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.148.228 X-ACL-Warn: Too high rate of unknown addresses received from you X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1JSKmf-0004Ki-7R. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1JSKmf-0004Ki-7R 20a3b6169cbf78832171ae35ffc483cd X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:07:01 -0500 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:89929 Archived-At: It looks like something went wrong so I am resending this. Sorry if someone gets it twice. Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote: > Puh! This was a long thread with lots of details. After reading it all I > think I agree with Juri, there are good reasons to turn on > cua-selection-mode by default (and have highlight of an active region on). > It looks like Kim already have been travelling the road we are on now. > > It looks to me like cua-selection-mode/cua-mode does not disturb the use > of the mark ring. Or does it? I do not use the mark ring myself. (Sasha? > Stefan?) > > I have cut and paste some arguments here for convenience and added some > comments: > > Juri Linkov wrote: >> Deactivating the region without the bell is possible with >> keyboard-escape-quit. >> >> But even this is not necessary: cua-selection-mode uses C-SPC C-SPC >> to set the mark without activating the region (more precisely the second >> C-SPC cancels the region activation). This is another reason to enable >> cua-selection-mode by default because this will help people who use >> the mark for navigational purposes. > > Juri Linkov wrote: > > In cua-selection-mode point movement deactivates the region only when > > the region was activated by shift-arrows. But when the region is > > activated by C-SPC, point movements extend the active region. > > I think this could be made a little bit more useful without sacrificing > consistency. > > cua-mode/cua-selection-mode activates the region with shift added to > some commands: arrows/home/end /C-arrows/C-home/C-end and deactivates > them if they are used without shift. This is how other applications > tends to do it too. So this is good in my opinion. > > However when it comes to other movement commands I think they should > extend the region since that is useful. If you want to deactivate the > region that is easy enough (C-g, the commands above). > > > David De La Harpe Golden wrote: > > On 21/02/2008, David De La Harpe Golden > >> Given apparent concern over mouse then keyboard interaction, maybe > >> pc-selection-mode needs to also deactivate the mark when cursor moves > >> after the _mouse_ has set the region... > > > > er... which cua-selection-mode already does... > > > Richard Stallman wrote: > > I am still trying to grasp the problem. Apart from the region to act > > with CUA keys like in all main applications I use today I would > expect > > > > * operations on the region should only happen when the region is > visible > > > > I do not understand clearly what you mean. > > > > Are you proposing a change? If so, what _concretely_ is that change? > > Yes. A bit more consistency. I think for all commands for which it is > useful to work for the region only they should do so when the region is > highlighted, otherwise not. > > However I should add that some users seem to want to have the region > active but not highlighted. That should be an option that they should > turn on if they want it. > > > Stefan Monnier wrote: > >> Don't we all think that new users probably want the highlight the way > >> cua-mode does it? > > > > Actually, in this respect, cua-mode isn't very different, as far as > > I can tell: you also get into those situations where the region is > > highlighted when you don't want it and you have to hit C-g to get rid > > of it. > >