From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: A new user perspective about "Changes for emacs 28" Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 14:39:41 -0700 (PDT) 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> <6b2eb02e-ec23-4ffe-9e11-5f4532f2bd15@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17366"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov , Ergus , Nicola Manca Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 07 23:40:42 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 1kFOsT-0004NF-Gc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 07 Sep 2020 23:40:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60222 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kFOsS-0001H3-CV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 07 Sep 2020 17:40:40 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53742) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kFOrd-0000p8-Po for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Sep 2020 17:39:49 -0400 Original-Received: from userp2120.oracle.com ([156.151.31.85]:39966) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kFOrb-0003fo-SE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Sep 2020 17:39:49 -0400 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 087LZGgC187073; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 21:39:43 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=EZzwP4Gzo39l/H/Y5fOnsYNCjwHiKwErXSMgrSZFteI=; b=uqXFQSn0fMzACk5ztpfU5/FP3CxStmbHunCOFNANufICQBstqsWE6KKDY+cQHhqkFQMn ksi/1rOwcQESrN+vLzs1Y/0LTKV7pexoqzxjOK9KT5Qzmfif50OhxRzik4b5Jk0A7H44 8UExZV/0I/A0BjRBrCDGizHM4gcR/BFm9pePr3WrMlPZ8LuKx3CWf8NQ4RSaL1JfoTj+ qVSEv+GvUpJBWxvIePxPYRH+NnsthBmTT/PZL6IeX7vv9081bM0noBwTir4IHi7fO8ix u/MxQdUTKssWpbnQoqUa2F5EmA1W1CrrhUtiYCVPHZwN9y0LZ2vHeNwqiavhe4KA8KQr eQ== Original-Received: from userp3020.oracle.com (userp3020.oracle.com [156.151.31.79]) by userp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 33c3amr0u7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 07 Sep 2020 21:39:43 +0000 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 087LVNb9194078; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 21:39:43 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by userp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 33cmeq1db9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 07 Sep 2020 21:39:43 +0000 Original-Received: from abhmp0011.oracle.com (abhmp0011.oracle.com [141.146.116.17]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 087LdgDa031150; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 21:39:42 GMT In-Reply-To: <6b2eb02e-ec23-4ffe-9e11-5f4532f2bd15@yandex.ru> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5044.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9737 signatures=668679 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=18 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2009070207 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9737 signatures=668679 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=18 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2009070207 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=156.151.31.85; envelope-from=drew.adams@oracle.com; helo=userp2120.oracle.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/07 17:39:46 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.1-3.10 [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -44 X-Spam_score: -4.5 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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:254684 Archived-At: > >>> Why on earth would we do that? Emacs undo > >>> is superior. > >> > >> undo-tree is superior. > > > > So now you're proposing that as the default, instead > > of the keybindings you proposed earlier today? >=20 > Nope. You're welcome to re-read the original message. No need to reread it. But you're welcome to, as many times as you like. (Perhaps you're trying to pick a nit, in that you supported that proposal but didn't initiate it.) ___ Do you think ordinary (non-Emacs) Undo plus Redo is superior to Emacs undo, and for that reason it should replace it as the default? Or do you think it is inferior, but it should replace Emacs undo as the default in spite of being inferior? Or perhaps _because_ of being inferior?