From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Avoiding moving point into minibuffer prompt area
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:43:53 -0400
Message-ID: <E1E58Hp-00050P-3d@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <DNEMKBNJBGPAOPIJOOICEELLCLAA.drew.adams@oracle.com>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1124225745 12073 80.91.229.2 (16 Aug 2005 20:55:45 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:55:45 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 16 22:55:44 2005
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1E58S3-00071A-VG
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:54:28 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1E58VU-0004lg-S0
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:58:00 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1E58TB-0003wJ-AX
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:55:37 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1E58T6-0003t2-C0
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:55:33 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E58T5-0003qr-CM
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:55:31 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1E58a8-0001fq-Vd
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:02:49 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1E58Hp-00050P-3d; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:43:53 -0400
Original-To: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
In-reply-to: <DNEMKBNJBGPAOPIJOOICEELLCLAA.drew.adams@oracle.com>
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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:42147
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:42147

    And a question - ignore, if this has already been beaten to death -
    shouldn't "inviolable" be the default value?

That seems like a good argument to me.  I will try that option myself
and see what I think of it.