From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: line-move-visual never set to nil? Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:57:34 -0400 Message-ID: <87od4k1nj5.fsf@stupidchicken.com> References: <18571.25125.311010.324079@gargle.gargle.HOWL> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1217098671 25507 80.91.229.12 (26 Jul 2008 18:57:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 18:57:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: raman@users.sourceforge.net Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 26 20:58:40 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 1KMoyT-0008JM-0O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Jul 2008 20:58:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51413 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KMoxZ-0007oF-Fp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:57:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KMoxV-0007nt-4p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:57:37 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KMoxU-0007nZ-1X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:57:36 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36371 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KMoxT-0007nW-U1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:57:35 -0400 Original-Received: from c-24-63-201-57.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([24.63.201.57]:15584 helo=furry) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KMoxT-00065U-Fp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:57:35 -0400 Original-Received: by furry (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9D2CEC059; Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:57:34 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <18571.25125.311010.324079@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (T. V. Raman's message of "Sat, 26 Jul 2008 10:43:01 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:101560 Archived-At: "T. V. Raman" writes: > As reported a few minutes ago, turning off visual-line-mode has > no effect. The apparent reason being: line-move-visual remains > set to T and that is what the code in functions next-line and > previous-line refers to. Now, line-move-visual is a defcustom. The question is, whether it should default to nil or t (even when visual-line-mode is off). The current default is t, which is a kind of hybrid model where line-move uses screen lines but other editing commands use logical lines. Like Stefan and others, I've found that this setting works pretty well in practice, for buffers in which there are occasional continued lines. (When the buffer is full of long lines, turning on visual-line-mode is more appropriate.) It's true, though, that this behavior could be confusing, especially for longtime users of Emacs. So maybe we ought to make line-move-visual default to nil, as before, and leave it to advanced users to change it to t for their own usage. What's the opinion of others on this list?