From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: John Wiegley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'. Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:51:17 -0800 Message-ID: References: <87vb98csu1.fsf@red-bean.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447267908 14229 80.91.229.3 (11 Nov 2015 18:51:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 18:51:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Artur Malabarba , Emacs Development To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 11 19:51:43 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwaUg-0002e2-LS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 19:51:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42437 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwaUg-0003zC-Bz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:51:42 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56663) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwaUR-0003z4-Mx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:51:28 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwaUM-0001Dd-Nn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:51:27 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-x22f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22f]:35606) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwaUM-0001D6-I5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:51:22 -0500 Original-Received: by pasz6 with SMTP id z6so39595507pas.2 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:51:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id:references :user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version:content-type; bh=dJNx69CNF4y5Iso/vKBu2SzRjHZStAFM+Gv4KxBEWKY=; b=lmCZ0WV1zFIQ4CC5//zPjXfGTWlYgzk7brQV9NZAmGBXJrnRpRFeWPoFJSnk1MNzrf /J2XnAf8yTKpFLMq2OH0K5u/n1WrWrzrwlzvfn5kD7nz24/IEimkkMu3W4abaf+LFpPE oMjWFwtuHbjtK3DMURHhPsnsN/ZHHp8IsOBKoPKNn0AZvC3pklEuhBmp3UbRVlzc0KVG vYekKjpQzXZcZunfvp0Rux9KEFbfKmOkfjxHk3b9f0rLPZkGp/wY6Myz0Bvoq8SLxuaL dd5ZBpUqHvu7YJtXtEl+wb86ITPNlso6vxdbIMrd+lsNRvruUXdEw3LynPFSeN8aq0wK Iyog== X-Received: by 10.68.134.1 with SMTP id pg1mr16579030pbb.133.1447267881995; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:51:21 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from Vulcan.attlocal.net (76-234-68-79.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [76.234.68.79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bs3sm10603011pbd.89.2015.11.11.10.51.20 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:51:20 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-From: "John Wiegley" Original-Received: by Vulcan.attlocal.net (Postfix, from userid 501) id 3AACA1055AC49; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:51:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87vb98csu1.fsf@red-bean.com> (Karl Fogel's message of "Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:08:06 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) Mail-Followup-To: Karl Fogel , Emacs Development , Artur Malabarba X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22f X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:194118 Archived-At: >>>>> Karl Fogel writes: >> 3. I think, when electric-indent-mode is on, open-line should indent the >> line that was created below if it isn't empty. May I go ahead? > Had I seen that question at the time, I would have answered "Oh, please > don't" :-). But maybe mine is a minority opinion? I encounter the new > behavior several times a day, and don't like it; turning off > `electric-indent-mode' seems like a drastic solution. But if people > generally like this new behavior, I'll certainly live with being in the > minority and figure out the appropritae local customization. I too would want the original C-o behavior. If you're using it an column 0, then the action of C-o is to create a new line, not to adjust indentation of the line you were on before the command. Now, you *could* have the new behavior using `electric-indent-functions', checking if the current command is `open-line'. So we're not making it impossible to do. But we shouldn't change long-standing behavior like this, in a subtle way that many users wouldn't know how to undo. John