Re: Please, Restore Previous Behavior for jump-to-register

[Eduardo Ochs <eduardoochs@gmail.com>]

On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 at 08:30, Alfred M. Szmidt <ams@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>    > This is the wanted behavior when you are about to overwrite a register.
>
>    Registers are primarily ephemeral storage, thus they should be altered
>    easily.
>
> And for non-ephemeral, we have bookmarks.
>
> Do people really have that many registers that they need to have a
> preview on all the time?  You can already hit ? to get a list of
> whatever you have when you jump-to-register if you get confused.

Hi all,

I got used to using only one register - `a' - because I couldn't
remember more than that and I didn't know about `C-x r SPC ?'... =(

The tools for previewing registers are great and I'm probably going to
start using them at some point, but I _guess_ that for some workflows
I will still prefer the behavior without any RETs... so let me add two
points - 2 and 3 - to my wishlist:

  1) please introduce variables that would let us use the old behavior
     - the one without any RETs,

  2) please write the functions in a way in which it would be easy -
     either with a bit of Lisp or with none - to define four key
     sequences, one for point-to-register-with-RETs, one for
     point-to-register-without-RETs, one for
     jump-to-register-with-RETs and one for
     jump-to-register-without-RETs,

  3) add a few sentences to the docstrings of point-to-register and
     jump-to-register to explain that the old behavior was without any
     RETs - but with `?' showing previews - and some people prefer
     that way, and to configure the behavior see that variables such
     and such and the functions such and such. That would make
     everything easy to discover

  Cheers, many thanks for these features, and probably thanks in
  advance =),
    Eduardo Ochs
    http://anggtwu.net/eepitch.html


P.S.: what was the thread in which the new behavior was discussed? I
missed it completely, sorry...