From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why act from point forward by default, instead of whole buffer? Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 06:44:32 -0400 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1190717986 25658 80.91.229.12 (25 Sep 2007 10:59:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:59:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 25 12:59:42 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 1Ia88j-0000mg-M1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:59:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ia88g-0007a1-2i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 06:59:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ia7um-0002o6-Ax for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 06:45:16 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ia7uk-0002mu-LD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 06:45:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ia7uk-0002mi-F8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 06:45:14 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ia7uk-0006N1-9Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 06:45:14 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ia7u4-0003O7-Ec; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 06:44:32 -0400 In-reply-to: X-Detected-Kernel: 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:79792 Archived-At: General question that occurred to me while reading thread "keep|flush-lines, how-many to be used backward": What is the advantage of having such commands (`keep-lines' and many others) act, by default, from point forward instead of (by default) on the entire buffer? They do act on the region, if it is active, so that's good. But why not have the entire buffer be the default if the region is not active? I use that behavior for many commands I define. It is historical tradition and I would rather not change it.