From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Karl Fogel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] When deleting in bookmark menu, prompt for confirmation. Date: Fri, 07 May 2021 12:40:35 -0500 Message-ID: <87a6p65tnw.fsf@red-bean.com> References: <87a6pcqy7s.fsf@red-bean.com> <83czu86o46.fsf@gnu.org> <835z006jpl.fsf@gnu.org> <87im3z3f8f.fsf@red-bean.com> <83zgxb67g2.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtt9sqh4.fsf@red-bean.com> <87czu58uso.fsf@gnus.org> <878s4tq8e6.fsf@red-bean.com> <871rak2qno.fsf@gnus.org> Reply-To: Karl Fogel Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18586"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri May 07 19:43:56 2021 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 1lf4W4-0004hu-4z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 19:43:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43514 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lf4W2-0004Zp-5Q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 13:43:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48968) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lf4T5-0002sw-VE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 13:40:53 -0400 Original-Received: from sanpietro.red-bean.com ([45.79.25.59]:34946) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lf4Sw-00074u-7z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 13:40:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=red-bean.com; s=202005newsp; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:Date:Reply-To:References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=J+J1snK4z6GQQXOzZJbbfTarY4/EddG85xwo3vai0NI=; t=1620409238; x=1621618838; b=IzqWz1DLM9sm5fJ9eRPBAjOygis4UE1UOmGu1s5O9rLEpTNJ+g3Y72yge8V2p/NtHd85I0vH9Z oAWdUfyAwZb8K41XyIKLBibQE7ZIFILJ1XpXvmZaKHEyeFKmyW0ZVzQf8eMnbEe5wmRXkBGe9c8uN 8hCPfNfLTYOc8U1ZjGo6XsSwbHAW3+uIyC1JUnL3JatazNOnB1h0WRTSrJm94XKvcLNlauaajePrC OMgDbbZC0jpDdGb4nPma5XUL8rfR82ZAxbqYfa7KJXaf4xn767HHmHoAIPkFdK40UuYs5jjCcMbaZ JoAXSWv7qV8dEGCqua2XLrhCifvmdZHmi7VeA==; Original-Received: from [12.106.183.66] (port=47140 helo=kwork) by sanpietro.red-bean.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lf4Sr-0001ZF-2A; Fri, 07 May 2021 17:40:37 +0000 In-Reply-To: <871rak2qno.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Thu, 06 May 2021 10:49:15 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=45.79.25.59; envelope-from=kfogel@red-bean.com; helo=sanpietro.red-bean.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:269011 Archived-At: On 06 May 2021, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: >It's not the same -- giving them the ability to recover is >better. :-) >We're teaching users to hit "y" after a whole bunch of commands, >and the >"y" becomes automatic. Ah, that's not a problem here. When a confirmation prompt is used to defend against *accidentally* performing an action that the user didn't intend to perform, then there is no habituation problem. In other words, sure, the "yes" *should* be automatic: if what you intend to do is execute the deletion of marked bookmarks, then you will (habitually and unthinkingly) type 'x yes RET'. No problem there. But when you *didn't* intend to do that, and you had simply hit 'x' by accident, then you're very unlikely to type 'yes RET' as the very next thing you do -- your brain isn't running that macro right now. So you'll be surprised when you find yourself at a confirmation prompt, and you'll look at what's happening and type C-g or 'no' to back out of the situation. The confirmation has served its purpose. The "confirmation is bad because habituation" argument is classic, but it only applies to situations where the confirmation was intended to make someone think more carefully about an intended action -- that is indeed foolish, but it's not what we're doing here. Confirmation whose purpose is merely to make sure that action was intended at all is not broken by habituation, but rather made stronger by habituation. Best regards, -Karl