From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: recursive edit in ispell sessions Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2013 21:44:55 +0200 Message-ID: <87mwtaw2fc.fsf@web.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1365445711 4951 80.91.229.3 (8 Apr 2013 18:28:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 18:28:31 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 08 20:28:35 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UPGnt-0000pw-AH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:28:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50888 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UOvWT-0002ba-Kh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:45:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42729) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UOvWQ-0002ZW-7G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:45:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UOvWM-0003sY-Vn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:45:02 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:64266) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UOvWM-0003sC-LK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:44:58 -0400 Original-Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.74.136.91]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M5fhI-1UmvY01TA0-00xrOr; Sun, 07 Apr 2013 21:44:56 +0200 Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:O4JIZBx4bRDsD+nFiqL+U6b4K1V+LMRedBJvqWnTZTI gFSi1cL+6NFpXbqR3sP/Emg/iVgLtB16EBeQ9GG2e8v3hffowg xmpSkfR9xdSweE0SmfFMe+q6jFsJjfMjpnbnvyfQhsccvOKip6 /+kSkDpclqZQRisZtTivXjcW3hLK+YwY42S8UxobDrkTNXeM/U Mh9L+E/2z0Fx8ltnYfHnOKgqDw9qE3WRSDSG9rOp+o= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.17.11 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:158773 Archived-At: Hi, I think the most common use of entering a recursive edit in an ispell session (C-r) would be to modify the checked buffer - especially, to substitute the currently checked word with some other text. But whenever I exit the recursive edit (C-M-c), the deleted text reappears and is highlighted again as unknown Try it with emacs -Q! My question: can we improve that? If this most simple case - replacing the current word - is not possible, we shouldn't IMHO advertise C-r in `ispell-help' etc. Or did I miss something? Thanks, Michael.