From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A new user perspective about "Changes for emacs 28" Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2020 00:31:57 +0300 Message-ID: References: <1ca462fa-0f9e-3c18-6386-f43f49388b2f@gmail.com> <20200907180812.5tfylspp7i6vl4o3@Ergus> <94fda087-a61b-356d-4bb4-791907593246@yandex.ru> <24302cf8-5ac8-4abd-83ce-3e33c51a8beb@default> <83k0x4mjsv.fsf@gnu.org> <831rjcmgn8.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="32585"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 Cc: nicola.manca85@gmail.com, ams@gnu.org, spacibba@aol.com, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 08 23:33:10 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kFlEj-0008Ol-U9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 23:33:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45608 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kFlEj-0005Yp-0m for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 17:33:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33726) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kFlDg-0004k4-FR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 17:32:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::230]:41559) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kFlDe-0006sK-DA; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 17:32:04 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id y4so778929ljk.8; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 14:32:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bz1NXz3f/CcNUJPwVNYNqyf7zoF1RK2u1MWFvjckd6c=; b=MOvkvgrqWVSyG0fi2Cdpe3qMx0iVXbRbRwYjQLpOSkJCzxbj0qkYIEe1khQRM3b7L0 MXt80cwuc8z/ngGf3wtoVtfmntwgOr5msShACAsM2nvRZ3mg3qrvRNGFRwvEjXe2KbWI 02jCKgdj67DaMnBL2ZGHjA0oRpt4JPrK9DxVPbNqotpQyU9L2SQbQHn1A1fH/niMW6t/ CGe8E+HV68BgmbR9aQgnj1KVgPIeLBHKXx6706f35Jg3Xi0lGNDaMLh/GHGnwLdaisuP 1Q3ioZSlbAeOiOq92RINVRcJCjKUKYOgBtK1X764YeVQIpQAbhOqK7y8wxbA9JsYr/Gq Yarg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bz1NXz3f/CcNUJPwVNYNqyf7zoF1RK2u1MWFvjckd6c=; b=RkOECr4qoqeWAevtTwvX6RS7EHd7G68gG3WZHT8F6xkEvzlWNuaZE6vwoZodD8Q0iR w9UFSUQu6RT0riA7YuX8b9XpvWSYqDjH48a6a50c0/PtsL7JHNSW6qCj5+LPw4U+0hMV y68wBwZ2tKe4TuiXlbvyrrnfRxRU2sp0YSaRDCmGfLsNAgnFRPRrfNdjDVlg528b2yuD OXb7sSH+I+D4TmBdkjICPrh/grnQi6xPdaL3Aed8X1ZhnD1jgpEmlrWZkvGExdSPKLAr KG7OLxVeeDHGchxHAqM00q3CrX3hG7e+7+6h6yXQH6OBlmBpSL5OrVs0LBIfLc2HvU0T yoKg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531QdjxR3RUu95Mnb5bWOQnP8tRQJSSAcP6mar2At3+9zOKzpmqL 4Cdn5w3tKU9WCusvU+7JNpGu9i3cM/E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw0q9fT6av+3adOuoWvU5umFPW7hL1KVjc22miN7Fdn9IKlDkNo2jir5YPT3cN+bld9jMXJIg== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:3e17:: with SMTP id l23mr214982lja.315.1599600719229; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 14:31:59 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.104] ([94.229.108.16]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id f26sm233626ljo.57.2020.09.08.14.31.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Sep 2020 14:31:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <831rjcmgn8.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Language: en-US Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::230; envelope-from=raaahh@gmail.com; helo=mail-lj1-x230.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -30 X-Spam_score: -3.1 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.626, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:254820 Archived-At: On 08.09.2020 18:28, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> On 08.09.2020 17:20, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>> Once more complex >>> situation arise, my opinion is that undo-tree is more complex and >>> harder to grasp than the Emacs undo, so I don't think undo-tree is >>> better suited to newbies than the default undo. >> >> I'm pretty sure undo-tree is better for complex situations thanks to of >> its visualization interface. > > If visualization is the main advantage, we could have visualization > for the default undo as well. That's not the complex part, and not > what differentiates between the 2 undo's. Having separate bindings shouldn't hurt either, especially in said complex situations. And try to consider how the visualization would look. I think it would have to be like a tree (basically, like the one undo-tree paints). Then it would probably be logical to have at least two different commands which allow traversing the buffer states in both directions along the branches of that tree. And presto, we got undo-tree again. Perhaps I'm lacking in imagination, though.