From: Karl Fogel <kfogel@red-bean.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 14:33:03 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878u64b7k0.fsf@red-bean.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m2vb98ffyv.fsf@Vulcan.attlocal.net> (John Wiegley's message of "Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:17:44 -0800")
John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes:
>Correct. We have several things in play here:
>
> 1. When electric-indent-mode is off, everything is fine.
>
> 2. When electric-indent-mode is on, C-o behaves in an unexpected fashion.
>
> 3. We should fix C-o when electric-indent-mode is on, so its behavior is not
> affected by electric-indent-mode.
I was only arguing for (3), FWIW. I have no opinion on whether electric-indent-mode should be on or off by default. When it is on, however, I don't think it should affect open-line's behavior anyway. The old open-line behavior is a better way for open-line to behave, and a less surprising behavior, even when electric-indent-mode is on.
Was this specific effect on `open-line' even contemplated in the prior discussion about turning on electric-indent-mode by default? I didn't follow that thread, but unless the topic was specifically raised, I don't think that "electric-indent-mode is now the default" equates to "open-line should have this new behavior".
Let me put it this way: if electric-indent-mode being *off* were still the default, and someone changed open-line to be sensitive to electric-indent-mode in this way, I'd still raise the same question: should open-line behave this way when electric-indent-mode is on?
So electric-indent-mode being on or off *by default* is unrelated to the open-line question. The question is, should open-line behave in this new way when electric-indent-mode is on? (And I think the answer is "no".)
> 4. We should disable electric-indent-mode by default.
>
> Since I wasn't present for the discussion when electric-indent-mode
> was enabled by default, I'd like to reopen that discussion with regard
> to 25.1. Probably on a separate thread from this one.
Neither for nor against, personally, but agree it is a separate thread anyway.
Best,
-Karl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-11 20:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-11 18:08 Questioning the new behavior of `open-line' Karl Fogel
2015-11-11 18:51 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-11 18:58 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-11 19:07 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-11-11 19:13 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-11 19:39 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-11 20:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-11-11 20:17 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-11 20:33 ` Karl Fogel [this message]
2015-11-11 20:37 ` Alan Mackenzie
2015-11-11 20:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-11-11 20:58 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-11 21:08 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-11 21:13 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-12 7:59 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-11 21:53 ` David Kastrup
2015-11-11 21:52 ` David Kastrup
2015-11-12 0:08 ` Rasmus
2015-11-12 8:06 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-12 10:00 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-12 11:08 ` Rasmus
2015-11-12 11:18 ` Andreas Schwab
2015-11-12 13:11 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-12 14:16 ` Rasmus
2015-11-12 14:44 ` Yuri Khan
2015-11-12 14:52 ` Rasmus
2015-11-12 14:54 ` Yuri Khan
2015-11-12 15:38 ` David Kastrup
2015-11-12 16:20 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-12 16:33 ` Pierpaolo Bernardi
[not found] ` <CAAdUY-LVoXm-c+Cv8Gx6h+d40YDoK4rJp1U6Tw+Gc+yCOVee=g@mail.gmail.com>
2015-11-13 1:17 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-13 6:04 ` Pierpaolo Bernardi
2015-11-14 12:34 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-14 19:39 ` David Kastrup
2015-11-17 0:42 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-17 0:53 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-17 3:46 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-17 22:57 ` Richard Stallman
2015-11-17 23:16 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-18 17:25 ` Andreas Röhler
2015-11-17 23:20 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-18 20:32 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-18 21:03 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-19 23:34 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-19 23:57 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-14 21:59 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-12 14:57 ` David Kastrup
2015-11-12 16:09 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-12 15:26 ` Rasmus
2015-11-11 20:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-11-11 20:28 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-11 20:55 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-11-11 21:00 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-11 21:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-11-11 21:17 ` Alan Mackenzie
2015-11-11 21:30 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-11 22:40 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-11 19:20 ` Paul Eggert
2015-11-11 19:25 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-11 20:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-11-11 21:50 ` David Kastrup
2015-11-11 22:24 ` Artur Malabarba
2015-11-11 21:31 ` John Wiegley
2015-11-11 21:46 ` Karl Fogel
2015-11-12 7:38 ` Andreas Röhler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=878u64b7k0.fsf@red-bean.com \
--to=kfogel@red-bean.com \
--cc=bruce.connor.am@gmail.com \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).