From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: AW: delete-selection-mode Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:42:12 -0700 Message-ID: <81674B067AF84670A2EDDB0178E0C0CC@us.oracle.com> References: <87ocitw2dl.fsf@stupidchicken.com><201003130001.o2D01FFQ003489@godzilla.ics.uci.edu><87vdd1yqe4.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87eijjzrkd.fsf_-_@mail.jurta.org><874okf8dep.fsf@lola.goethe.zz><7697A57B1AD9104F993CDF6A5B69430C0A70E50872@CORPMAIL08.corp.capgemini.com><4BA0CDF9.40707@online.de><76682E4761EA432EB929E5E199B0F92A@us.oracle.com><87wrxb57e1.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87sk7z571u.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1268848300 12659 80.91.229.12 (17 Mar 2010 17:51:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:51:40 +0000 (UTC) To: "'David Kastrup'" , Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 17 18:51:36 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrxP5-0004ne-HD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 18:51:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38612 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NrxP4-00058i-VX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:51:35 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NrwKB-0007lX-C9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 12:42:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=38913 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NrwK9-0007jI-Ec for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 12:42:26 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrwK7-0006xP-6j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 12:42:24 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet11.oracle.com ([141.146.126.233]:26884) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrwK7-0006xE-0p; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 12:42:23 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by acsinet11.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o2HGgHYf010328 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:42:19 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt354.oracle.com (acsmt354.oracle.com [141.146.40.154]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o2HDYaRx020087; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:42:16 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt019.oracle.com by acsmt355.oracle.com with ESMTP id 88929511268844133; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:42:13 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/130.35.178.194) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:42:12 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <87sk7z571u.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Thread-Index: AcrF4lv7stIBQ2pxQ3WvRwshVUhkpAABlAIg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Source-IP: acsmt354.oracle.com [141.146.40.154] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090205.4BA10669.003F:SCFMA4539814,ss=1,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:122099 Archived-At: > the I-want-things-just-like-with-Notepad crowd Emacs with delete-selection-mode turned on is a beautiful thing. It's the way Emacs was meant to be by the Great GNU in the Sky. (And no, it does not make Emacs like Notepad - that's a shiny red herring, if not a boogeyman.) FYI, I too used Emacs without delete-selection-mode, for years and years. I used it without a mouse for years and years. And without a menu. And without faces...and frames... I know all about the Emacs region and mark; thank you. I suspect (no proof) that most of those who decry delete-selection-mode also do not use transient-mark-mode. The latter is now the default in Emacs (no thanks to the Great-Wall-I-dont-want-Emacs-to-adopt-and-adapt crowd). If one uses transient-mark-mode, IMHO it also makes sense to use delete-selection-mode. That's really the heart of the question regarding the default, I believe. I'd even suggest that if any new light is to be shed onto this thread it will come from arguments about using transient-mark-mode *without* delsel. The rest is rehash (and even some of that more narrow focus might be rehash - we'll see). To put it mildly, folks who do not even use transient-mark-mode or delsel mode, or at least those who have little experience with them, are perhaps not the best placed to offer advice on whether delsel would add something to t-m-mode as the default behavior. And no, we should not reconsider t-m-mode's status as the default - c'est un droit acquis ;-). Please, let's not hear the same old arguments that were put forth to prevent t-m-mode's acceptance as the default (and that's what we've heard from you, so far, no?). It took us years to settle that question. The Wall finally crumbled; the anti-t-m-mode crowd lost that battle. Just get over it. Emacs newbies now get t-m-mode by default. Hoorah. Let's hear instead from those who use transient-mark-mode *without* delete-selection-mode (intentionally, not just by default or from ignorance of delsel). Let us know why t-m-mode without d-s-mode is the right choice as a default for Emacs. That could be an interesting discussion. And it alone is really pertinent to the question at hand. We should not be contrasting Emacs without t-m-mode to Emacs with delsel mode. We should be contrasting Emacs with only t-m-mode to Emacs with delsel mode (which includes t-m-mode). Anything else is noise and obfuscation at this point.