From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Visual line movement inconsistency Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:46:06 +0900 Message-ID: <87prnsmywh.fsf@catnip.gol.com> References: <874p55z20j.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1219970727 7331 80.91.229.12 (29 Aug 2008 00:45:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:45:27 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 29 02:46:21 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 1KYs84-0005et-1U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 02:46:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45108 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KYs73-0001NM-OC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:45:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KYs6y-0001Kv-8g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:45:12 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KYs6w-0001Io-Id for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:45:11 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57775 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KYs6w-0001IV-Ed for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:45:10 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp11.dentaku.gol.com ([203.216.5.73]:38660) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KYs6p-0002Cs-Pz; Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:45:05 -0400 Original-Received: from 218.231.174.190.eo.eaccess.ne.jp ([218.231.174.190] helo=catnip.gol.com) by smtp11.dentaku.gol.com with esmtpa (Dentaku) id 1KYs6k-0005It-Pg; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:44:58 +0900 Original-Received: by catnip.gol.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 60879DF74; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:46:06 +0900 (JST) System-Type: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: <874p55z20j.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> (Tassilo Horn's message of "Thu, 28 Aug 2008 15:45:48 +0200") Original-Lines: 20 X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV GOL (outbound) X-Abuse-Complaints: abuse@gol.com X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:103122 Archived-At: Tassilo Horn writes: > But is this inconsistent behavior of C-n/C-p and C-a/C-e really the > intended default? I think it would be better if C-a/C-e respected the > value of `line-move-visual', too. Then the default would be like > visual-line-mode without word-wrapping. It was discussed and the current behavior seemed to be the consensus choice. I agree that it can be confusing, but I think it's much more dangerous to change the default behavior of C-a/C-e, because people depend a lot more on their precise behavior (whereas C-n/C-p are more often used in conjunction with visual feedback). -Miles -- Alliance, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pockets that they cannot separately plunder a third.