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: position on changing defaults? Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:57:43 +0100 Message-ID: <47D95D07.60306@gmail.com> References: <200803050637.m256bXL3008361@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <87hcfkdhqk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87pru8enjx.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <8763vy95a6.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87wsoc39i8.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <877igb7dsi.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87hcff5upc.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87fxuxsg3m.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87r6egp8oo.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <47D86DC6.4080805@gmail.com> <47D88B17.7000004@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 1205427517 3419 80.91.229.12 (13 Mar 2008 16:58:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:58:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: miles@gnu.org, cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Michael Kifer , "Kim F. Storm" To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 13 17:58:55 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 1JZqlZ-0000W3-TP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:58:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZql1-0004Wo-0w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:58:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZqku-0004VD-Tv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:58:12 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZqkt-0004Uj-A3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:58:12 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZqkt-0004Uc-3t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:58:11 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.212]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZqkp-0004r7-2z; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:58:07 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-148-228.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.148.228]:60355 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JZqkf-00042F-4l; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:57:57 +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: X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080313-0, 2008-03-13), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.148.228 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1JZqkf-00042F-4l. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net 1JZqkf-00042F-4l 54f0ad7a10ba586bea4cd5d870f67125 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) 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:92422 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier wrote: >>>>> AFAICT, the approach I proposed where most/all the movement commands get >>>>> changed to call a special function in the interactive spec wouldn't >>>>> suffer from any such problems. I think it's the best approach so far. >>>> I can not see what the advantage with an interactive spec over a property on >>>> the function name is. Could you please tell? >>> Very simple: no magic, no pre/post-command-hook. > >> Why is an interactive spec less magic than the property on a function name? >> To the end user (non-lisper) it could be equally visible, or? > > The property is irrelevant. The relevant problem is the code that uses > those properties which is placed on pre/post-command-hook. There are obviously (at least) two problems: - whether to use property or interactive spec, and - whether to do things in an interactive spec or in the command loop (maybe using a hook then). Does not using only an interactive spec makes things very stiff? What if the user wants other commands (that he/she has not written self) to join the dance? >> The pre-pre/post-post-command-hook I proposed has nothing to do with this, >> or? (I believe such a hook could be used for other emulations too, >> like Viper.) > > Such a proposal is just making things worse. That is not my intention ;-) If a property is used then the dance must happen in the command loop. For that I have (several times) suggested using new hooks: pre-pre pre doit post post-post Handling of shift should AFAICS be done early, ie pre-pre. There are however other emulations than the shift-emulation that may require handling as late as possible instead. One such thing is Vipers move-related copy and cut commands. I think a post-post hook could serve to generalize those Viper copy and cut commands. It could also be used to restrict movements to a field for example. (I cc:ed Michael K. I hope I am not misunderstanding this.)