From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: follow-link in grep buffer Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:18:59 -0800 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1109382082 32668 80.91.229.2 (26 Feb 2005 01:41:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 01:41:22 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 26 02:41:22 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D4qxG-0004Ro-QR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 02:41:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D4r8Y-0005IN-Hy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:52:54 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D4r8I-0005GV-HH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:52:38 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D4r89-0005Ad-2V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:52:33 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D4r82-00055P-Ky for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:52:22 -0500 Original-Received: from [141.146.126.229] (helo=agminet02.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1D4qiH-00057Z-Tc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:25:46 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmgw1.us.oracle.com (rgmgw1.us.oracle.com [138.1.191.10]) by agminet02.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j1Q1J3ZR008431 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:21:29 -0800 Original-Received: from rgmgw1.us.oracle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rgmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.4/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j1Q1J3DJ004309 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:19:03 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap (dhcp-amer-whq-csvpn-gw3-141-144-80-93.vpn.oracle.com [141.144.80.93]) by rgmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.4/Switch-3.1.0) with SMTP id j1Q1J3OC004295 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:19:03 -0700 Original-To: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 In-Reply-To: X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE 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 X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:33823 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:33823 > Bad generalization. A better generalization is "Whenever David > discusses something, he screams like Howard Dean in Iowa." But > neither generalization is very good. Whatever. Enough people have pointed out by now that they see little merit or sense or consistency or logic in my proposals. So I'll just stop screaming and let others decide. Chalk that one up to my bad sense of humor - I apologize. None of us need ad hominem arguments; I was trying to say that, sarcastically, by making such an argument myself. FWIW, I don't find your double-click-to-follow+single-click-to-set-pt suggestion worse than my opposite idea. In fact, your reference to the coding guideline about click-1 and click-2 convinced me that my suggestion was not a good one. Thanks for that reminder. I doubt too that people in general see "little sense" in your proposals in general or in this proposal, in particular. Quite the contrary. I personally think it's worth kicking this particular design problem around a little more, to see if the discussion doesn't come up with something elegant. There have been several proposals so far that I find acceptable, but I don't think we've yet reached that "Eureka!" moment that brings a really contented consensus. It's not as if this problem is critical or urgent. We can do something not-too-unreasonable for the current release and think about it some more for later.