From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `C-b' is backward-char, `left' is left-char - why? Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 19:48:55 +0300 Message-ID: <83ipsmeu88.fsf@gnu.org> References: <6F4054004B154CFB8E2753172D316C13@us.oracle.com> <4DE4F8D0.7010800@lanl.gov> <82y61l16bg.fsf@gmail.com> <87vcwo40tn.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <834o48f6sa.fsf@gnu.org> <8762on3rvj.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83lixjdkae.fsf@gnu.org> <871uzb3q1d.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1307120921 818 80.91.229.12 (3 Jun 2011 17:08:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 17:08:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 03 19:08:37 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QSXrP-0007uf-Vd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 19:08:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44439 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QSXrP-0003Uh-46 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 13:08:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:46197) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QSXYJ-0007ec-8q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 12:48:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QSXYH-0006JB-PN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 12:48:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:34332) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QSXYF-0006Il-4w; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 12:48:47 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LM800B003YWLQ00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 19:48:45 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.223.140]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LM8009F0416XVM0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 19:48:43 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <871uzb3q1d.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 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:140138 Archived-At: > From: David Kastrup > Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 17:14:54 +0200 > > > What do you mean by the "current direction"? > > Reading direction at point (possibly split into reading direction to the > left of point's screen position, and reading direction to the right of > point's screen position). I'm actually very happy this is not what is needed, because otherwise we'd need to perform a large part of reordering for moving in the buffer (because you cannot always trust the display to be up to date). And that is even before we talk about the ambiguity (which you mention above) on the L2R/R2L boundaries, which would need to be resolved by some complicated features on the user level. These are nicely avoided by the current behavior. > >> This is what Hebrew writers expect? > > > > Yes. > > Weird. The idea is that moves forward when the paragraph direction is L2R, and moves forward in R2L paragraphs. But they both move in the reading (a.k.a. "logical") order, which in Emacs means in the direction of increasing character positions. Moving in strict visual order (i.e. always left or right on the screen) is also possible, but less desirable, because that's not the order in which people read the text. But what you suggest is neither visual nor logical order, so it seems to be the worst of both worlds. I, for one, have trouble predicting where I will wind up, and need to think carefully before I give the right answer. That's not a good UI, IMO.