From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [found the culprit] Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 13:03:36 -0500 Message-ID: References: <875zx1xgiq.fsf@mat.ucm.es>> <83lg5w9956.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0r76ewm.fsf_-_@mat.ucm.es>> <87tvkjq2mh.fsf_-_@mat.ucm.es>> <834lcj8y1f.fsf@gnu.org>> <83y39v7gym.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1542218521 6230 195.159.176.226 (14 Nov 2018 18:02:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 18:02:01 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 14 19:01:57 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gMzUB-0001Vl-Vf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 19:01:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33629 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gMzWG-0003FU-UP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 13:04:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46290) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gMzW8-0003FO-4z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 13:03:56 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gMzW5-00028B-0r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 13:03:56 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=57148 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gMzW4-00020y-By for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 13:03:52 -0500 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gMzTp-0000z0-AN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 19:01:33 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 26 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:nTG+Xecscsvu+wsOaciX0XS4K5c= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:231142 Archived-At: > I just mentioned what it uses, and has used for a > long time. And it's a general scheme, applied to `dired-do-*' > commands generally. The conflict is not a minor one, e.g., > affecting just `Z'. FWIW, I don't think it's a good scheme. Better would have more mark-management commands that you can then combine with any dired command without having to fight with conflicting uses of C-u. E.g. commands to "push" and "pop" the current set of marked files, and a command that you can iterate like your C-u which will first mark the current file, then the files in the current directory, then ... A nice advantage to C-u is that these would give you visual feedback about which files are selected. > 2. How does the above C-u usage "not follow Emacs's use of C-u"? Emacs usually does not use multiple C-u and also tries to avoid distinguishing between "just C-u" and "a numeric argument". There are exceptions to both of those "rules", and I'm to blame for some of those exceptions, but I think this case is not a good candidate for an exception because there are too many "sets of files" that the user might like to specify, so we'll be better served by providing this separately than trying to cleverly cram some common cases into the narrow C-u. Stefan