From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: hw Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: delete-selection-mode as default Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2018 07:15:10 +0200 Organization: my virtual residence Message-ID: <87efe39rq9.fsf@toy.adminart.net> References: <83k1nxvm5j.fsf@gnu.org> <877ejxsm18.fsf@toy.adminart.net> <87mustqugw.fsf@toy.adminart.net> <87788f91-e086-7bcf-4ded-47fac7ccf3e9@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1536581909 22649 195.159.176.226 (10 Sep 2018 12:18:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 12:18:29 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit-Claudel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 10 14:18:25 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fzL96-0005n9-Ph for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:18:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51387 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzLBD-0001eH-BM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 08:20:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48478) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzL2w-00010Z-LD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 08:12:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzKyQ-0000mh-LV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 08:07:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mo6-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([2a01:238:20a:202:5300::10]:30465) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzKyO-0000gb-3Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 08:07:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1536581237; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=adminart.net; h=References:Message-ID:Date:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=pJW13mUHyh2vYKjAaEN08Y0qiG3QoO0EpvvU4cFYNGs=; b=GA68B4DucAgI+qP3TrkVoC96uknwCvDF87Yd0W4KD0wjnMxxhdAAl5fD5EX0zL319S VN4X2pZ/FWJckeRdew1v8e3J36rD1w2vwlyVhEYK/fwH9PYt7bCuiGSjN0yAZbj5udxZ qkcT6FKAG9yU7ZXjuGWNCQHhpkqmc62viv0kkGtQTswtDMuovb1AU9nIRipl8IOnUML5 M0xRgmKpC/Zv7IinvWvSkRLvVxKmPfegUDf6+laUs9YRGxvf/huTzExXRIxNSf8J1C9j X2k87pKeBdSgxP3H8tNFkJ5M71LrVVq3XtWnOZXKGsBVxwbWcT4URal/ah8es4VRF5wK OQwA== X-RZG-AUTH: ":O2kGeEG7b/pS1FS4THaxjVF9w0vVgfQ9xGcjwO5WMRo5c+h5ceMqQWZ3yrBp+AVdIIwXjneEe9k=" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Original-Received: from himinbjorg.adminart.net by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 44.0 DYNA|AUTH) with ESMTPSA id e03b99u8AC7GGrq (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (curve secp521r1 with 521 ECDH bits, eq. 15360 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate); Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:07:16 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from toy.adminart.net ([192.168.3.55]) by himinbjorg.adminart.net with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1fzKyJ-0000x1-Mb; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:07:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87788f91-e086-7bcf-4ded-47fac7ccf3e9@gmail.com> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit-Claudel"'s message of "Sat, 8 Sep 2018 13:37:39 -0400") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2a01:238:20a:202:5300::10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:229619 Archived-At: Cl=C3=A9ment Pit-Claudel writes: > On 2018-09-07 10:39, hw wrote: >>> On 2018-09-07 05:18, hw wrote: >>>> When a selection is active, why would anyone assume that typing >>>> an arbitrary letter is supposed to replace the entire selection, >>>> or to disable it? > >>> Out of experience, mostly. When almost every other program you >>> use besides Emacs behaves that way, it's easy to assume that Emacs >>> will behave the same way. > >> It's not my experience because when I want a selection deleted, I >> delete it. If it gets deleted otherwise, that's a mistake or maybe >> even a bug when no undo is available. > > You seem to be conflating experience and desirable behavior. You could say that --- as long as I don't press the wrong key, I'm getting desirable behaviour. >> I call it a design flaw because if whoever made it this way had >> given any thought to it, it would at least be customizable > > Fortunately, some of those who "made it that way" did think about it > :) For example, Microsoft Word has an option called "Typing Replaces > Selected Text." That's a good thing. > Unfortunately, I couldn't find a similar setting in OpenOffice, nor in > LibreOffice. Gtk entries and textviews do not seem to provide a > similar setting, either, but I wouldn't assume that they didn't give > any thought to it. Why not? >> Software supporting users in making mistakes and making the mistakes >> even worse suffers from design flaws unless doing so is the very >> purpose of the software. > > I'm having trouble following the reasoning.=20=20 Hm, let my try to explain: The reasoning assumes that one important benefit of software is the possibility to prevent mistakes, for example by validating the input made by a user and by questioning or rejecting it when it is suspicious. You can design software such that it provides this benefit and such that it does not. You can also design software such that it makes it more likely that mistakes happen and such that it makes the effects of mistakes worse. In case it was not your intention to design your software so that it makes it more likely that mistakes will happen, or that it makes mistakes worse, but your software does that, your software has a design flaw. As for selections, this means that you can make your software so that not every random keystroke makes them disappear, or you can make your software so that the selection basically disappears with every random keystroke. Since random, accidental keystrokes sometimes happen, your software --- assuming its purpose is not to make mistakes worse --- has a greater benefit to the user and no design flaw when it protects the user from such mistakes by not letting the selection disappear. It can't very well protect the user from random, accidental keystrokes, but it can make the mistake worse by making the selection disappear when they occur. If it does that, it has a design flaw. Of course, there can be a problem when the user does not want to be protected, or when it becomes troublesome to use the software because it is overprotective. In case of Emacs, a user can make a setting that makes the effect of mistakes worse. Some users are asking to make this the default while others are against it. >> I suspect that one important reason for the dangerous and careless >> dealing with selections you find in many other programs is that the >> developers couldn't be bothered to find a better way. > > I understand that feeling, but I don't see much to support it. From > the same observations, you could just as well conclude that no one > cared enough about the behavior offered by Emacs to send patches to > OpenOffice, Gtk, or many of the other libre IDEs and text editors. I don't understand how multiple possible reasons for the impossibility of bothering the developers would not all the more support the suspicion that they couldn't be bothered.