From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.orgmode Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Adding custom providers for thingatpt.el (was: [PATCH] Add support for 'thing-at-point' to get URL at point) Date: Tue, 07 May 2024 21:01:54 +0300 Message-ID: <86r0eda4bx.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87leba3ame.fsf@localhost> <88435424-afa3-d7a3-56ff-df9f0a2ca6ba@gmail.com> <875xz39cgp.fsf@localhost> <87ttk6da89.fsf@localhost> <673a0f71-c91f-8461-7388-9efbed6ba24f@gmail.com> <0c66ae28-7088-3ac7-be39-7714b8f80455@gmail.com> <87mspcave3.fsf@localhost> <253c058a-d349-41a7-7733-c73075bffcb6@gmail.com> <87sez36pvl.fsf@localhost> <2f344439-d0d6-a3e5-963c-773bb5c833d6@gmail.com> <8634qtbypq.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23640"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: drew.adams@oracle.com, yantar92@posteo.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org To: Jim Porter Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue May 07 20:02:18 2024 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 1s4P8s-0005xC-6i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 07 May 2024 20:02:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1s4P8c-0004iv-Vk; Tue, 07 May 2024 14:02:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1s4P8b-0004iB-4E; Tue, 07 May 2024 14:02:01 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1s4P8a-0003CW-5B; Tue, 07 May 2024 14:02:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=/nzdB57bdmaBVdXNm+gYpAgi6x4j2mRmik00E9EWrV8=; b=fWYF2zm+hVrv BPN3gXhdnMWGN/SQUPmlVXghtqE7NIwVzAStlZrlHyldCY6F0h99M2XycXIyNHW8Itw6DdEKxmYX4 RnW49f9vYd6zvb9VV0WTJFA/J6q3qfWpF4bk+FKcsemX1XkR6zxzsWKoICtTdUfZIyoqX8bh08Esw oNY9GcVYkQxG7XCcfjchbqAHpvDjyVwBau75/ERG7U1EUsYpLj+aFvL01t9INTPnijro2EMAAUFTe rDuIKQSrJJJl7YvQAgL+6j9I9++4l/ezHDrdjALI/fMhNG9MUd7vb5umxMG+CWIbuEsDDrywfzajm Dqj16o8pyE7MSs7WdGXzuw==; In-Reply-To: (message from Jim Porter on Tue, 7 May 2024 09:10:59 -0700) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:318968 gmane.emacs.orgmode:161539 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 09:10:59 -0700 > Cc: yantar92@posteo.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > From: Jim Porter > > On 5/7/2024 5:20 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > I disagree. These functions are nowadays the basis of many > > interactive features, and users are usually mightily confused by the > > fine print of what "at point" means technically in Emacs. The current > > operation is much easier for users to grasp mentally by observing the > > position of the cursor, whether it's on or just after the "thing". > > At the risk of veering off-topic (I mainly care about adding > 'bounds-of-thing-at-point-provider-alist' and > 'forward-thing-provider-alist'), would adding a new optional STRICT > argument to 'thing-at-point' and friends be an ok resolution for > everyone? This argument would enable Drew's proposed behavior. That way, > users get all the nice behavior by default just like today, and > programmers who require strict correctness in their code also have an > option. If enough people want the other behavior, I won't object to supporting that as well as an option.