From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: point-min and 1 Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:30:03 +0200 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <87hbwakajo.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <83vdkvjbet.fsf@gnu.org> <4A813774.1030309@gmx.at> <83tz0ejjm8.fsf@gnu.org> <4A82839E.2010409@gmx.at> <83ljlpj5im.fsf@gnu.org> <4A83E27B.1030802@gmx.at> <4A84568F.7040706@gmx.at> <87ocqjv0dw.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <4A850F3A.3010005@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1250242245 23081 80.91.229.12 (14 Aug 2009 09:30:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 09:30:45 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 14 11:30:38 2009 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 1Mbt7N-0001nK-En for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:30:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43625 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mbt7M-0007aV-Fd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:30:36 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mbt7F-0007ZV-91 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:30:29 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mbt79-0007Q5-Mv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:30:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38163 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mbt79-0007Pl-CW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:30:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:43243) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mbt79-00028T-02 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:30:23 -0400 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mbt78-0008IO-C5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:30:22 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Mbt6y-0008Om-Sa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 09:30:12 +0000 Original-Received: from p5b2c3116.dip.t-dialin.net ([91.44.49.22]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 09:30:12 +0000 Original-Received: from dak by p5b2c3116.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 09:30:12 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 16 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p5b2c3116.dip.t-dialin.net X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:7yQ39MefGtpXC9RoazaIQdY1d8I= X-Detected-Operating-System: by mx20.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:114230 Archived-At: martin rudalics writes: >>> I'd opt for two new primitives `goto-point-min' and `goto-point-max'. >> >> And `goto-line-noninteractively' ;) > > Hmmm.... Every second use of `point-min' is within the idiom (goto-char > (point-min)). So I think I have a point here. That's exactly why you don't have a point. Every second use of "think" is within the idiom "I think", and yet we don't use a separate word for it. Because we don't need a separate word for a common simple idiom comprised of elementary parts. -- David Kastrup