From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Karl Fogel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: isearch-yank-char Date: 26 Apr 2004 17:48:32 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <877jw2cq4f.fsf@floss.red-bean.com> References: <874qr7l59b.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <20040426230345.GA8594@fencepost> Reply-To: kfogel@red-bean.com NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1083042653 18388 80.91.224.253 (27 Apr 2004 05:10:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 05:10:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juri Linkov , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 27 07:10:40 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BIKrg-0001Ga-00 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 07:10:40 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BIKrg-0007G3-00 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 07:10:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BIKp9-0005jS-32 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 01:08:03 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BIKod-0005QF-C3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 01:07:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BIKnh-0004aK-Tq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 01:07:06 -0400 Original-Received: from [207.115.63.73] (helo=pimout5-ext.prodigy.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BIKnY-0003uu-RW; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 01:06:24 -0400 Original-Received: from floss.red-bean.com (adsl-66-73-175-183.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.net [66.73.175.183]) by pimout5-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3R563JN107882; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 01:06:03 -0400 Original-Received: from kfogel by floss.red-bean.com with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1BIEts-0003Ch-00; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 17:48:32 -0500 Original-To: Miles Bader Emacs: the answer to the world surplus of CPU cycles. In-Reply-To: <20040426230345.GA8594@fencepost> Original-Lines: 32 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:22208 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:22208 Miles Bader writes: > Yeah .. and it's one of those things about which it's risky to make > judgements based on personal experience -- people seem to vary a _lot_ in the > way they use isearch (I'm always a bit surprised when I watch someone else > using it...). > > It's a shame, because it would be nice to use more "normal" bindings in > isearch to do "isearchey variants", but it's probably necessary to be pretty > conservative. In this case, I wonder if we're not being overly conservative. If people learn by experience that certain commands no longer exit isearch as before, and instead cause isearch to behave in new ways, this might be okay as long as the experiences aren't too painful. And I think these wouldn't be terribly painful. The benefits (very useful new functionality in isearch) are permanent, the costs are temporary and probably not large. I agree with the conservatism argument in general -- it nearly drove me crazy when C-a's behavior in shell-mode changed -- but conservatism is less important in situations that are unlikely to be reflexive editing idioms for users. While C-f (and C-b) are practically spinal reflexes when used in a "normal" editing context, they are much less likely to be reflexive *when used as isearch exiting methods*, because isearch is much less frequented than regular editing modes, and because everyone who is in isearch is already conscious that they're in a "special" editing state. People's minds are already a bit prepared for something unusual to happen in isearch, so it's not as bad when it does. -Karl