From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: TAB for non-editing modes Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 17:33:22 -0700 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1190594023 16674 80.91.229.12 (24 Sep 2007 00:33:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 00:33:43 +0000 (UTC) To: Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 24 02:33:38 2007 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 1IZbtJ-0005Nq-Cf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:33:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZbtG-0004Wv-RL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 20:33:34 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IZbtD-0004Wg-AI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 20:33:31 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IZbtC-0004WU-Tz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 20:33:31 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZbtC-0004WR-OK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 20:33:30 -0400 Original-Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IZbtC-0003EH-BF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 20:33:30 -0400 Original-Received: from agmgw1.us.oracle.com (agmgw1.us.oracle.com [152.68.180.212]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id l8O0XR4q021770 for ; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 18:33:27 -0600 Original-Received: from acsmt351.oracle.com (acsmt351.oracle.com [141.146.40.151]) by agmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.0/Switch-3.2.0) with ESMTP id l8NM7rCs016723 for ; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 18:33:27 -0600 Original-Received: from dhcp-amer-whq-csvpn-gw3-141-144-80-220.vpn.oracle.com by acsmt350.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3238448751190593978; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 17:32:58 -0700 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Detected-Kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 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:79640 Archived-At: > >> Doing this with kill commands would take away a feature: you can = use > >> them in read-only buffers to copy text to the kill ring. That = feature > >> may not be very useful in read-only buffers, but I am not convinced = it > >> is an improvement to make it entirely unavailable there. > > > > Granted. But it could be argued that this "feature" is really a=20 > > bug that we exploit (because it seems useful) ;-). Because it is > > inconsistent with normal use (killing) of those commands/keys, > > it promotes user error and possibly confusion. The user does not > > even get proper feedback about this "trick" - s?he still gets > > the read-only error message/reminder, and there is no indication > > that anything was copied. I don't know if this "feature" is > > even documented. >=20 > Of course it is. There even exists an option to remove the read-only > error--`kill-read-only-ok'. Cough; hack. Why is this better than using the corresponding standard copy commands? = What do we gain by this complexity and inconsistency?