From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New undo element (fun . args) Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 09:14:49 -0500 Message-ID: <87sm48mpo6.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> References: <87fz0jyn19.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <87mzunvyki.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1107786783 16655 80.91.229.2 (7 Feb 2005 14:33:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:33:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, "Kim F. Storm" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 07 15:33:02 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy9wc-0008PU-HS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 15:32:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyAAi-0002py-3n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 09:47:28 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy9xA-0003zb-Vs for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 09:33:29 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy9x2-0003v0-IG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 09:33:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy9x0-0003lp-R1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 09:33:18 -0500 Original-Received: from [209.226.175.25] (helo=tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Cy9f7-0001Kb-VZ; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 09:14:50 -0500 Original-Received: from alfajor ([65.92.240.235]) by tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.10 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP id <20050207141449.OSDI2026.tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@alfajor>; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 09:14:49 -0500 Original-Received: by alfajor (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0D59BD7343; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 09:14:49 -0500 (EST) Original-To: David Kastrup In-Reply-To: (David Kastrup's message of "Mon, 07 Feb 2005 13:25:35 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) 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 X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:33005 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:33005 > A _lot_ of people are annoyed at the way `undo' also redos things. > For that reason, a package redo.el exists, and people get told about > it frequently on Emacs lists and groups. > I consider it likely that with the new changes, this package will no > longer work. It's possible of course, I haven't looked at how it's written, but I find it unlikely. The most obvious way to implement it doesn't need to look at the undo elements. > I also have detected the variable undo-no-redo (not customizable, though) > which wouls appear from its name and description to solve one half of the > problem, The command is called `undo-only' and I had originally bound it to C-x U (i.e. a stronger version of C-x u since it skips over matching undo-redo pairs in the undo-list), but Richard reminded me that we do not like to bind different commands to uppercase and lowercase commands and I haven't bothered to try and find another binding for it. > the remaining half being that an actual redo command working in > the opposite direction would be required. C-f C-/ C-/ C-/ ... Maybe we should arrange that calling `undo' after `undo-only' does not continue undoing but switches to redo instead, so that redo.el would amount to (defalias 'redo-undo 'undo-only) (defalias 'redo-redo 'undo). > Since we are likely to break redo.el, wouldn't it be sensible to > provide the functionality from within Emacs once and for all? I find redo.el to remove functionality rather than to provide it. But I did go through the trouble to implement undo-only. Stefan