From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: mark-word Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 01:35:28 +0900 Message-ID: <8764044wfj.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <200711140835.41856.andreas.roehler@online.de> <873av9gsap.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1195058035 7006 80.91.229.12 (14 Nov 2007 16:33:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:33:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Leo Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 14 17:33:58 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 1IsLBZ-0003z3-S3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:33:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IsLBN-0004q3-7Y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:33:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IsLBJ-0004nu-Ma for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:33:37 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IsLBH-0004jk-Aj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:33:37 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IsLBG-0004jE-JZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:33:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IsLBG-0003N6-2f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:33:34 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (unknown [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E45E1535A8; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 01:33:31 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B196D1A2E12; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 01:35:28 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.5 (beta28) "fuki" (+CVS-20070621) XEmacs Lucid X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:83195 Archived-At: Leo writes: > > `mark-word' itself should remain compatible with `kill-word' and > > `mark-sexp'. > > Why? Erm, backward compatibility is a good thing. "Why *not* preserve it?" is the right question, and it better have a good answer. More specifically, mostly because it's a pain in the neck to deal with functions whose specifications change for the convenience of the UI, and because it's an offense against the general regularity of names with no good reason. True, symbol names are somewhat scarce, but I rather doubt anyone in their right mind would give `mark-entire-word' anything but the proposed semantics. It should be easy for people who actually prefer that behavior (if any, I admit) to revert. And some of us support Emacsen that won't have the change, often simultaneously with the latest code. XEmacs does so as project policy, and many organizational environments will do so too.