From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Reitter Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: please make line-move-visual nil Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 09:20:44 -0700 Message-ID: References: <4A0C402C.7060804@slugfest.demon.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1242318111 29985 80.91.229.12 (14 May 2009 16:21:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 16:21:51 +0000 (UTC) To: Emacs-Devel devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu May 14 18:21:45 2009 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 1M4dgb-0008N6-NI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 18:21:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40291 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M4dga-0004yL-Nu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 12:21:32 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M4dg6-0004pQ-8G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 12:21:02 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M4dg1-0004p3-L8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 12:21:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56955 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M4dg1-0004p0-HW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 12:20:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.220.169]:47460) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M4dg1-00036Q-7i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 12:20:57 -0400 Original-Received: by fxm17 with SMTP id 17so1498451fxm.42 for ; Thu, 14 May 2009 09:20:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:date:references:x-mailer; bh=oAXpUpogCNjB+hJ8Xfc0qsH/S7CfOpFcFI/M7pqIN30=; b=rSQgqxY1Q+//ip/vPnzvQlZeYMGhXLmTeqqa6tes45UURYdf0YEqMJ7935hdDEOzai aCb1bQZr7uaVvY0Y/4uce428XR+lGI5/qDRSRmg27oVb/wHQgBL2T+OOnRfq766hYXof zhCv0IcQdheAy50gic5ntmKH0BYZ5s13axkPg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :x-mailer; b=bSuW+xXaD3PHSFiCpBXmIF22xhMaTMgn9/YgEeMumP4M4t6cZQjOl0Wp+CZ/JAMSjN rDtyOiOFsXptdeG4Bpiiu9alh+d8gCRiEv6niUR9fnMjynKGqCZovWAGnGDiP1ofy+5f mbPKOnbWmIU+F6ck3S/K5882cvYh3AoZLjuD8= Original-Received: by 10.103.215.15 with SMTP id s15mr1622293muq.118.1242318056234; Thu, 14 May 2009 09:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from ?192.168.1.152? ([69.26.225.190]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t10sm178654muh.0.2009.05.14.09.20.54 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 14 May 2009 09:20:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4A0C402C.7060804@slugfest.demon.co.uk> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:110874 Archived-At: On May 14, 2009, at 9:00 AM, Shaun Johnson wrote: > Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: >> Please make line-move-visual nil, it is totally uninutive to have the >> point move to the same line, when you explicitly told it to move to >> the next line. > FWIW I completely agree, I find this behaviour bizarre in the extreme. > I appreciate that others, coming from a different background, may find > this behaviour intuitive but I don't see that as a reason to change > such > a core behaviour. For people seeking to understand the reasons behind this default choice at this late stage in the release process, it may be helpful to review the discussions here about the new word-wrap (soft wrapping) feature, where continued buffer lines comprise whole paragraphs in text rather than just the occasional over-long line in code. Also, consider the increased use of variable width fonts, which are standard for non-code text in modern operating environments. On a more general note, I wonder why experienced users occasional resist change in the UI in general (as it breaks things) rather than avoiding to upgrade. Perhaps, providing bug fixes for previous branches (e.g., Emacs 22) for a few years after the release of a new full version would mitigate these issues.