From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Default behaviour of RET. Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 01:15:20 +0400 Message-ID: <52659968.5070900@yandex.ru> References: > <8361sqli02.fsf@gnu.org>> <1730ebf3-db44-498c-b2a9-4d288d83a946@default> <87k3h6xuen.fsf@yandex.ru> <1878e4fa-50f2-4655-a4ff-30d1db708ee8@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.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 1382390149 1968 80.91.229.3 (21 Oct 2013 21:15:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 21:15:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rudalics@gmx.at, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, acm@muc.de, Eli Zaretskii , stephen@xemacs.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 21 23:15:53 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VYMpN-0007op-2J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:15:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41899 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VYMpM-00070G-Hz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:15:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48683) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VYMpC-0006zS-RY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:15:48 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VYMp7-0002wZ-FO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:15:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ea0-x235.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c01::235]:64486) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VYMou-0002ei-Ub; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:15:25 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ea0-f181.google.com with SMTP id d10so3722366eaj.26 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:15:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aepeV47huLPUpB18PjgnhwtWXy9EQH1hTDo8k57qa8Y=; b=h/8y5tWS5gHbRgJyOhVosc9xh8QQp2kPriTFQap/7vQRQ45/9HeBSZ+t8sggqP+c4v H0wYrS1d5RJzjwPiHxQBjVVul9mO7CsoD99pM5O3IiH/9t6/1AFHsBF2Qf9ZCp0q8Dry zgkqEokDP4V1a8QlqH/MjpMySLY/twUSUnKTb2EPgsvNpkboWL0CTsly6JLCgZdUtPUG 1J0yZ47uSnjJCB5bQPnT1UlWHWy0HGCaMjL+RBzBKKLPX6PhWxTefI7RtEZ7d2gOYll4 kzIzgtChjtajVyZgfq4vg5mCQ7Bfl9E9XKc79dUHeYnmLPmn24IrkDseRMwHJcHU8vi8 rvFg== X-Received: by 10.15.24.68 with SMTP id i44mr835159eeu.87.1382390123863; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:15:23 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.3] ([178.252.98.87]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w6sm37709853eeo.12.2013.10.21.14.15.22 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:15:23 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 In-Reply-To: <1878e4fa-50f2-4655-a4ff-30d1db708ee8@default> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4013:c01::235 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:164437 Archived-At: On 22.10.2013 00:53, Drew Adams wrote: >> Every IDE does that when the user presses RET. > > Not if you count Emacs as an IDE. ;-) Only if you like splitting hairs. Counting Emacs among points of reference for proposed change in Emacs behavior is useless. >> The question is what would be the sane default. > > The default Emacs behavior for this is quite sane, and has been so > for almost 40 years now. It is sane because it is old? That's a bad argument. > That it is not the same as the default behavior of this or that > other application does not make the Emacs default behavior insane. The Emacs default settings are considered outdated by many of its users (here's one tiny example: https://github.com/technomancy/better-defaults). So discussing changes in long-established behaviors can be useful. >> You seem to be under impression that Eli is somehow new to using >> Emacs. > > You seem to be fantasizing. The "foreign vantage point" is an > outside view, nothing more. Yeah, and who's outside? One of the most prolific Emacs contributors? > That is the argument, no? "All the > other guys are doing it another way." Read it this way: "won't somebody think of the poor new users?" And: "quite often standard behavior emerges for a reason". > If you view Emacs `C-j' from the point of view of "every IDE" then > I guess it is possible to find it "much less convenient" than `RET'. > Otherwise, it is not. It's ~twice as inconvenient, for obvious reasons. > There is nothing new that makes the difference in convenience > between `C-j' and `RET' any greater now than it has been at any > point in the past. Exactly the same difference: same mole hill. It's not the greatest of problems one might find with Emacs, true. > For Emacs, `C-j' has been considered convenient for this behavior > for a very long time. And I, for one, still find it convenient. > It doesn't get much more convenient than `C-j'. Circulez ; il > n'y a rien a voir. You still haven't answered why you want RET to be bound to `newline'.