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: Shift-movement selection Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:25:33 -0400 Message-ID: References: <200803050637.m256bXL3008361@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <87hcfkdhqk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87d4q8sq9c.fsf@jurta.org> <8763w0n393.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <871w6ounk0.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87ablacdxt.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87skyzzeng.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87fxuyobxt.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <47D56474.9000300@gmail.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205227825 6974 80.91.229.12 (11 Mar 2008 09:30:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:30:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@jurta.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, storm@cua.dk, miles@gnu.org To: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 11 10:30:52 2008 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 1JZ0oq-0004dW-Rc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:30:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ0oI-0007UC-4k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:30:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ0jq-0003d3-M9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:25:38 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ0jo-0003cf-BP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:25:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ0jm-0003cb-IE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:25:35 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ0jm-0006SQ-AU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:25:34 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ0jl-0004i4-Of; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:25:33 -0400 In-reply-to: <47D56474.9000300@gmail.com> (lennart.borgman@gmail.com) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: 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:92139 Archived-At: Or am I misunderstanding? Do you say that only commands that have this particular `interactive' spec should activate/deactivate the mark (depending on whether the shift key was used or not)? In general it is not clean for a command's behavior to depend on the keys that invoked it. A given command should do a given thing; then users can make any key do that thing, by binding it to that command.