From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: position on changing defaults? Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:35:41 +0100 Message-ID: <87fxuxsg3m.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> References: <200803050637.m256bXL3008361@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <87hcfkdhqk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87pru8enjx.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <8763vy95a6.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87wsoc39i8.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <877igb7dsi.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87hcff5upc.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205231862 21636 80.91.229.12 (11 Mar 2008 10:37:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:37:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, miles@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 11 11:38:09 2008 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 1JZ1s0-0001n0-TF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:38:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ1rS-0005Eo-H1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:37:34 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ1pi-0004XH-PB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:35:46 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ1pg-0004W4-DL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:35:45 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ1pg-0004Vx-7Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:35:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-relay.sonofon.dk ([212.88.64.25]) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ1pf-0007BR-Nv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:35:44 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 63204 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2008 10:35:42 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO kfs-lx.rd.rdm.cua.dk) (213.83.150.21) by 0 with SMTP; 11 Mar 2008 10:35:42 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Mon\, 10 Mar 2008 13\:16\:32 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.92 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: FreeBSD 4.6-4.9 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:92144 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > > I haven't thought hard enough yet about what his suggestion does, so > > could you expand on its downsides? > > 1) It binds special commands to the shifted keys, which doesn't > work for minor modes which put different commands on the > non-shifted keys. > > Can you show a scenario so we can judge whether this has significant > implications? I can only say that over time, I've had people tell me that when they enable some xyz-mode, the shift-region keys no longer works as expected. The cause has always been that the mode rebound e.g. the arrow keys to some variation of the normal cursor movement. Adding the 'CUA property to the relevant commands fixed the problems. However, your proposal to bind S- to a command which runs the command of the underlying unshifted key would actually do better than that, as it doesn't need to know in advance what that command is. Actually, I think your approach is the best proposal so far! > > 2) C-h k S-down doesn't show the doc string of the original command. > > We could change C-h k to DTRT. Yes. > 3) It only works with transient-mark-mode off, so explicit > region start C-SPC has no highlighting. > > Can that be fixed? I suppose so. > > 5) This approach is already used by s-mark and pc-selection-mode... > > (Which approach is "this" approach?) Explicitly binding shift keys -- but they bind them to individual commands. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk