From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: 23.0.60; whitespace.el mishap Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:04:52 +0900 Message-ID: <87y79lvbxn.fsf@catnip.gol.com> References: <47A93D3A.90308@gnu.org> <47AA7C97.2020505@gnu.org> <47B65876.7040009@ig.com.br> 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 1203131126 14876 80.91.229.12 (16 Feb 2008 03:05:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 03:05:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rgm@gnu.org, mwd@cert.org, rms@gnu.org, rv@gnu.org, emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org To: Vinicius Jose Latorre Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 16 04:05:47 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 1JQDMz-00016F-K6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:05:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JQDMT-0004I0-TE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:05:09 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JQDMP-0004Fv-Fl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:05:05 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JQDMO-0004DF-0a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:05:05 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JQDMN-0004D8-EV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:05:03 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JQDMN-0000qI-BJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:05:03 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166] helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JQDMN-000112-2W for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:05:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JQDMK-0000pm-2f for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:05:03 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp11.dentaku.gol.com ([203.216.5.73]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JQDMJ-0000pQ-En; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:04:59 -0500 Original-Received: from 203-216-97-023.dsl.gol.ne.jp ([203.216.97.23] helo=catnip.gol.com) by smtp11.dentaku.gol.com with esmtpa (Dentaku) id 1JQDMD-00009V-Hq; Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:04:53 +0900 Original-Received: by catnip.gol.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 810652FF7; Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:04:52 +0900 (JST) System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: <47B65876.7040009@ig.com.br> (Vinicius Jose Latorre's message of "Sat, 16 Feb 2008 00:28:54 -0300") Original-Lines: 36 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-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: 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:89213 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:21129 Archived-At: Vinicius Jose Latorre writes: > Well, indeed the old whitespace-buffer had reported > where the bogus whitespace had happened. > > Instead of reporting, the new whitespace-mode > displays visually the bogus whitespace. > > Is it ok if the new whitespace-buffer is removed? > > Maybe a better alternative should be to create a > whitespace-report command which reports like the old > whitespace-buffer. My personal opinion is that the old whitespace mode was pretty wacky, and had lots of unneeded features and features which didn't follow Emacs conventions. It doesn't seem necessary to me to _exactly_ preserve the interface (maybe some def-obsolete-alias could be used in some case), just keep those commands which were actually useful, and maybe try to make them follow emacs conventions better. E.g., how about: + `suspicious-whitespace-mode' -- highlights only "suspicious" whitespace, i.e., that which probably should be removed. This is sort of like the old "whitespace-buffer" command, but implemented as a proper mode, or like your "whitespace-mode", but only highlights suspicious whitespace. [dunno about the term "suspicious", but you know what I mean] + `cleanup-whitespace' -- removes suspicious whitespace [same definition as suspicious-whitespace-mode] -Miles -- Defenceless, adj. Unable to attack.