From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: MBR Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Poll about proposed change in DEL (aka Backspace) and Delete Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 00:28:20 -0400 Message-ID: <4E8A8B64.9090705@arlsoft.com> References: <87litcvtu2.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050203020004010007070008" X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317702529 18592 80.91.229.12 (4 Oct 2011 04:28:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 04:28:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, info-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, Richard Stallman To: emacs-delete-poll@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 04 06:28:45 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RAwcW-0005cR-7s for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 06:28:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40856 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RAwcV-0006Gd-Ap for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 00:28:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:41359) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RAwcQ-0006GK-Hk for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 00:28:39 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RAwcO-00013V-TK for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 00:28:38 -0400 Original-Received: from cario.hostforweb.net ([66.225.230.82]:50554) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RAwcI-00012h-5R; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 00:28:30 -0400 Original-Received: from c-24-61-86-182.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([24.61.86.182]:2614 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by cario.hostforweb.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RAwcG-0008Vp-0O; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 23:28:28 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.20) Gecko/20110804 Thunderbird/3.1.12 In-Reply-To: X-Antivirus-Scanner: Clean mail though you should still use an Antivirus X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cario.hostforweb.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - gnu.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - arlsoft.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-Received-From: 66.225.230.82 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:82435 Archived-At: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050203020004010007070008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Richard. On 9/29/2011 11:42 PM, Richard Stallman wrote: > In Emacs 24, now in pretest, a change is being considered for ASCII > DEL (on most keyboards, the Backspace key) and the Delete function > key. The change affects the case of an active region that was not > dragged with the mouse. The change is that these commands would > delete the region, rather than just one character as now. > > In the past, this behavior was enabled in some minor modes: CUA mode, > Delete Selection mode, and PC Selection mode. In the 24.0.90 pretest, > this behavior is enabled by default. Thus, building and using the > pretest is an easy way to try the change. > > Here are the questions we hope you will answer: > > * Are you in favor of this change? No. I would not favor this change. > * Are you opposed to this change? Yes. I would oppose the change. > * How strongly do you feel about the matter? Rather strongly. > We don't want to just "count votes" -- we want to understand > how this affects users. So if you care about the issue, > please tell us how the change affects your editing. > > * What are the cases where you find it helps? There are no cases. > * What are the cases where you find it hurts? If I understand the proposal correctly, the idea is to bind the function normally bound to C-w to the BACKSPACE key and the Delete key. Have I got that right? As things currently stand, there are three different kinds of delete functionality I use: delete 1 character backward, delete 1 character forward, and delete the marked region. For over 25 years I've been used to those functions being invoked by BACKSPACE, C-d, and C-w respectively. Yes, I could retrain myself, just as I had to do years ago when IBM put the CTRL key in the wrong place. But it will inevitably be a big pain. If it weren't core functionality you were proposing changing the assignments of, I probably wouldn't care. But delete functionality is some of the most basic functionality of any editor, just as stop functionality is some of the most basic functionality of a car. What do you think would happen if some car manufacturer decided to violate the established standard that the brake pedal is to the left of the gas pedal? If that were to happen, I'm pretty sure there would suddenly be a whole lot more car crashes because people would be confused about which pedal does what. Changing keystroke assignments isn't going to cause life-threatening crashes, but it will inevitably cause millions of pico-crashes -- not anything that's going to cause serious harm, but enough to cause real annoyance. I remember back during the Apple look-and-feel wars you were distributing a flyer arguing that if look-and-feel had been the law of the land when the typewriter keyboard was first designed, every typewriter company would have had to invent its own incompatible layout, and instead of typists we'd have Remington keyboard typists, Smith-Corona typists, Olivetti typists, etc. Keystroke letter assignments on a typewriter and keystroke function assignments for critical functionality in an editor should change seldom or never. > * What is your level of Emacs experience? After about 10 years of using vi, I switched to Emacs around 1990, and it's been my preferred editor ever since. However I'm embarrassed to admit that I've never gotten around to teaching myself Emacs Lisp. It's truly amazing how much you can get done with Emacs even without programming it! > A further change in the same area has been suggested: when there is an > active region, a self-inserting character would delete the region > before the character is inserted by default. > > * What would you think of this further change? It sounds like the goal here is to make Emacs behave like MS Word. Why? If I wanted to use Word, I'd run Word or Libre Office. > Please send your responses to emacs-delete-poll@gnu.org. > > I do appreciate that you're asking your users' opinions. I hope you decide the right way, i.e. my way :-). (That's a joke, I say, that's a joke, son! -- Foghorn Leghorn) Mark Rosenthal mbr@arlsoft.com --------------050203020004010007070008 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Richard.

On 9/29/2011 11:42 PM, Richard Stallman wrote: 
In Emacs 24, now in pretest, a change is being considered for ASCII
DEL (on most keyboards, the Backspace key) and the Delete function
key.  The change affects the case of an active region that was not
dragged with the mouse.  The change is that these commands would
delete the region, rather than just one character as now.

In the past, this behavior was enabled in some minor modes: CUA mode,
Delete Selection mode, and PC Selection mode.  In the 24.0.90 pretest,
this behavior is enabled by default.  Thus, building and using the
pretest is an easy way to try the change.

Here are the questions we hope you will answer:

* Are you in favor of this change?
No. I would not favor this change.
* Are you opposed to this change?
Yes.  I would oppose the change.
* How strongly do you feel about the matter?
Rather strongly.
We don't want to just "count votes" -- we want to understand
how this affects users.  So if you care about the issue,
please tell us how the change affects your editing.

* What are the cases where you find it helps?
There are no cases.
* What are the cases where you find it hurts?
If I understand the proposal correctly, the idea is to bind the function normally bound to C-w to the BACKSPACE key and the Delete key.  Have I got that right?

As things currently stand, there are three different kinds of delete functionality I use: delete 1 character backward, delete 1 character forward, and delete the marked region.  For over 25 years I've been used to those functions being invoked by BACKSPACE, C-d, and C-w respectively.  Yes, I could retrain myself, just as I had to do years ago when IBM put the CTRL key in the wrong place.  But it will inevitably be a big pain.

If it weren't core functionality you were proposing changing the assignments of, I probably wouldn't care.  But delete functionality is some of the most basic functionality of any editor, just as stop functionality is some of the most basic functionality of a car.  What do you think would happen if some car manufacturer decided to violate the established standard that the brake pedal is to the left of the gas pedal?  If that were to happen, I'm pretty sure there would suddenly be a whole lot more car crashes because people would be confused about which pedal does what.  Changing keystroke assignments isn't going to cause life-threatening crashes, but it will inevitably cause millions of pico-crashes -- not anything that's going to cause serious harm, but enough to cause real annoyance.

I remember back during the Apple look-and-feel wars you were distributing a flyer arguing that if look-and-feel had been the law of the land when the typewriter keyboard was first designed, every typewriter company would have had to invent its own incompatible layout, and instead of typists we'd have Remington keyboard typists, Smith-Corona typists, Olivetti typists, etc.  Keystroke letter assignments on a typewriter and keystroke function assignments for critical functionality in an editor should change seldom or never.

* What is your level of Emacs experience?
After about 10 years of using vi, I switched to Emacs around 1990, and it's been my preferred editor ever since.  However I'm embarrassed to admit that I've never gotten around to teaching myself Emacs Lisp.  It's truly amazing how much you can get done with Emacs even without programming it!
A further change in the same area has been suggested: when there is an
active region, a self-inserting character would delete the region
before the character is inserted by default.

* What would you think of this further change?
It sounds like the goal here is to make Emacs behave like MS Word.  Why?  If I wanted to use Word, I'd run Word or Libre Office.
Please send your responses to emacs-delete-poll@gnu.org.
I do appreciate that you're asking your users' opinions.  I hope you decide the right way, i.e. my way :-). (That's a joke, I say, that's a joke, son! -- Foghorn Leghorn)
Mark Rosenthal
mbr@arlsoft.com

--------------050203020004010007070008--