From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `*' interactive spec in some text-killing functions Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:55:59 +0200 Message-ID: <86r6nwwdog.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <85bqf0649m.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <86ps3gy02e.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <86lke4xz7z.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <86d4zgxxet.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <864pksxwul.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1183028175 3241 80.91.229.12 (28 Jun 2007 10:56:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:56:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel To: "Juanma Barranquero" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 28 12:56:13 2007 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 4.50) id 1I3rfY-000234-Ml for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:56:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I3rfW-0003Mq-Sf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 06:56:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I3rfT-0003Lh-BS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 06:56:07 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I3rfR-0003LB-IU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 06:56:06 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I3rfR-0003L0-Cf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 06:56:05 -0400 Original-Received: from pc3.berlin.powerweb.de ([62.67.228.11]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I3rfQ-0006B1-Hf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 06:56:05 -0400 Original-Received: from quinscape.de (dslnet.212-29-44.ip210.dokom.de [212.29.44.210] (may be forged)) by pc3.berlin.powerweb.de (8.9.3p3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA05801 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:55:56 +0200 X-Delivered-To: Original-Received: (qmail 28332 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2007 10:55:59 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO lola.quinscape.zz) ([10.0.3.43]) (envelope-sender ) by ns.quinscape.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 28 Jun 2007 10:55:59 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id BA3478F832; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:55:59 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Juanma Barranquero's message of "Thu\, 28 Jun 2007 11\:22\:14 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.51 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 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:73991 Archived-At: "Juanma Barranquero" writes: > On 6/28/07, David Kastrup wrote: > >> You still choose to ignore the difference between a warning and an >> error. > > And you insist in conflating what the error/warning distinction does > programmatically (which I'm not talking about) with the transmision of > information (irrelevant to you, not to me) to the user. > > And you do so through contrived examples. I've never ever done (setq > xkkdkqqrqwefv t) by accident. Have you? I have done a lot of setq commands with a non-existing variable name by accident, yes. Anyway, what does it imply to toggle overwrite-mode _by_ _accident_ in a readonly buffer? It is not unheard of that it is toggled accidentally since the Insert key is easy to hit by accident. But the _one_ case where this accident will have no unexpected consequences at all, namely in a readonly buffer, you want a warning. What for? What are the ill consequences of not heeding the warning? You can't even destroy text accidentally with the changed setting since the buffer is readonly. -- David Kastrup