From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Pushing the mark from a primitive like goto-char Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 09:32:28 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5d29ce9e-a923-4515-b760-0f7411bbad3a@default> References: <9815d21d-b20e-c6d8-aae0-77aa65a4138a@gmx.at> <87sg7pq2bx.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <7a7c50cd-91dc-a818-f8a2-eacfb6243318@gmx.at> <87y2hgh0sr.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <3a739296-94f1-4a72-b1a1-1f9237b82c9d@default> <87k0sziqau.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18783"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: martin rudalics , Philipp Stephani , =?iso-8859-1?B?RGFuaWVsIE1hcnTtbg==?= , Stefan Kangas , Emacs developers To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 30 18:34:41 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 1kufMu-0004lX-Si for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:34:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45800 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kufMt-0008JX-U2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 12:34:39 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46512) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kufL6-0007QY-9n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 12:32:48 -0500 Original-Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:47902) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kufL4-0006Zu-F2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 12:32:48 -0500 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0BUHPkSE107282; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:32:39 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=XVaNcn2lWFMNRyWrG0ymGhjWLFe7QG+YIn67XgAzpxM=; b=PpFqlaoIwubhAhRWgYYDm3FneH92eIf0sXtMoMsJJDkLtqLy04cWLc+0/yqSzsaa1ytB Ys04qQHyycnwuPHgj4Ryt8EiyWHcGr6o8s97aVogA9cx06aWQRWtAgHxQfq/J8ZfUSuu AHQmQexjF9Ga1P8aW0HwqOYFqekv07JkNcaC5Kaedmae+gh+aJsASsHFi/hZJ4ucZGI8 lTfqHokV/g7smp0Y/mFHMdRXu7EF04AfhhYnpDnjsNutxeLJwih1eYha/8OmZ6B0yw0I yyJmbjdtapWrlhMbI2g/dlpeI1Jo+gJMh4655sFxp2z6FoQO2ZeICyyNDYxktJV/jdTQ cw== Original-Received: from aserp3030.oracle.com (aserp3030.oracle.com [141.146.126.71]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 35nvkqsawb-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:32:39 +0000 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0BUHQ446024152; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:32:38 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 35pernmhtr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:32:38 +0000 Original-Received: from abhmp0016.oracle.com (abhmp0016.oracle.com [141.146.116.22]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0BUHWT5k011628; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:32:29 GMT In-Reply-To: <87k0sziqau.fsf@mail.linkov.net> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5095.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9850 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=796 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012300109 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9850 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=816 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012300109 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=156.151.31.86; envelope-from=drew.adams@oracle.com; helo=userp2130.oracle.com X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham 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:262133 Archived-At: > > it's not clear to me why we'd want to move > > `goto-line'. (And I can't think about it, as I have > > no idea what `goto-line-relative' is/does.) >=20 > Because there is no difference between them when the buffer > is not narrowed, i.e. most users won't notice the difference. > Alternatively, 'M-g M-G' could be bound to goto-line-relative > (if it's still easy to type on tty). The choice mostly depends on > what the users will mostly use: goto-line or goto-line-relative? As I said - no idea what `goto-line-relative' is/does. >From what you say now, it's like `goto-line', except when the buffer is narrowed. Other than that, I still have no idea. Anyway, a priori it makes more sense to bind the new command to a new key sequence (if we bind it at all), no?