From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: AW: AW: New undo element (fun . args) Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 15:49:48 +0100 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1745903225==" X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1107789508 26293 80.91.229.2 (7 Feb 2005 15:18:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 15:18:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, storm@cua.dk Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 07 16:18:27 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyAeV-0007tB-Pe for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 16:18:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyAse-0007OH-69 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:32:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CyAsL-0007Nc-5q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:32:33 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CyAqz-000772-Rt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:31:11 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyAqr-0006u0-I3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:31:01 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.76.162.229] (helo=world1.sdm.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CyAD1-0005xD-K1; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 09:49:52 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=world1.sdm.de) by world1.sdm.de (MTA) via esmtp id 1CyAD0-0006Rv-Ot; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 15:49:50 +0100 Original-Received: from mucns1.muc.sdm.de ([193.102.180.22]) by world1.sdm.de (MTA) via esmtp id 1CyAD0-0006Rq-0b; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 15:49:50 +0100 Original-Received: by mucns1.muc.sdm.de (MTA) via esmtp from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=sdmmail1.sdm.de) id 1CyACz-0005nE-VK; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 15:49:50 +0100 Original-Received: from mucmail1.sdm.de ([193.102.180.175]) by sdmmail1.sdm.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Mon, 7 Feb 2005 15:49:49 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: AW: New undo element (fun . args) Thread-Index: AcUNIElH5K2TyLUNT6yRZM3Ome3A3QAAzgpe Original-To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Feb 2005 14:49:49.0275 (UTC) FILETIME=[45E81AB0:01C50D24] 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:33010 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1745903225== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C50D24.45AF0A68" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C50D24.45AF0A68 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >Hmm... all the users I know sooner or later asked me about some = unexpected >behavior from `undo' and after I explained to them how it works, they = all >learned to like it. >Even tho I did mention redo.el as an alternative, none of them ever = switched >to using redo.el, instead they started to complain about other programs = not >having a real undo like Emacs's. Then these are your experiences with "your" users... but for me an undo = is annoying (and even quite unuseable) which doesn't protect me against accidentally "undoing some undos" (i.e. with current Emacs-undo i get no information from Emacs that my undo-action is not really an undo but a = redo of a previous undo - if you understand what i try to say ;-) And when undoing some steps i often reach a point where i do not know = exactly where i'm in the undo-chain - whereas with redo.el i exactly know when i = have undone all and when there is nothing more to undo - IMHO much more = intuitive... but maybe it#s a matter of taste... Ciao, Klaus Stefan ------_=_NextPart_001_01C50D24.45AF0A68 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable AW: AW: New undo element (fun . args)

>Hmm... all the users I know sooner or later asked = me about some unexpected
>behavior from `undo' and after I explained to them how it works, = they all
>learned to like it.

>Even tho I did mention redo.el as an alternative, none of them ever = switched
>to using redo.el, instead they started to complain about other = programs not
>having a real undo like Emacs's.

Then these are your experiences with "your" users... but for = me an undo is
annoying (and even quite unuseable) which doesn't protect me against
accidentally "undoing some undos" (i.e. with current = Emacs-undo i get no
information from Emacs that my undo-action is not really an undo but a = redo
of a previous undo - if you understand what i try to say ;-)
And when undoing some steps i often reach a point where i do not know = exactly
where i'm in the undo-chain - whereas with redo.el i exactly know when i = have
undone all and when there is nothing more to undo - IMHO much more = intuitive...
but maybe it#s a matter of taste...

Ciao,
Klaus


        Stefan

------_=_NextPart_001_01C50D24.45AF0A68-- --===============1745903225== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel --===============1745903225==--