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: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:51:31 -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> <87myp4p88k.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205344460 27344 80.91.229.12 (12 Mar 2008 17:54:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:54:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, lennart.borgman@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@jurta.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, miles@gnu.org To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 12 18:54:47 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 1JZVA2-00055f-N5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:54:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZV9U-0002GY-8J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:54:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZV72-0007yA-L8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:51:36 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZV6y-0007tS-T7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:51:36 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZV6y-0007tB-KP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:51:32 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZV6y-0004Lm-Em for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:51:32 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JZV6x-00079C-5E; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:51:31 -0400 In-reply-to: <87myp4p88k.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> (storm@cua.dk) 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:92305 Archived-At: So it would need to be implemented by some special > feature that checks for shift. But I think that is an unclean way to > do things. > I strongly disagree that doing things consistently for the user is unclean. It is unclean in Emacs to hard-wire the meaning of the shift key. That is what CUA mode does now - and it works _very_ well. E.g. to mark a word, line, or sexp, just do S-M-f, S-C-n, or S-C-M-f. Why force people to use the arrow-keys etc. when we have the perfect emacs bindings already. What bothers me is not that S-C-f would enable the mark, but that C-f would disable it. That is an incompatibility in something important. But if disabling the mark has no effect in the contexts where it now has no effect -- for instance, with Transient Mark mode off, or mark-even-if-inactive t, then the incompatibility only affects an unusual non-default mode of operation, so it is tolerable.