From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Tentative diagnosis of TMM's problem. [Re: Enabling TransientMark Mode by default] Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:44:41 -0800 Message-ID: <001001c8742b$54382300$0600a8c0@us.oracle.com> References: <200802151711.m1FHB3Y3008798@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu><200802171658.m1HGwQ4h011067@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu><20080219085231.GA1032@muc.de><200802190938.m1J9ccVg016565@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu><20080219190127.GA1106@muc.de> <877ih0o9dx.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <20080220200142.GA1979@muc.de><006e01c8740e$366ebbd0$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> <87prurb20i.fsf@catnip.gol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1203566802 25143 80.91.229.12 (21 Feb 2008 04:06:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:06:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, 'Sascha Wilde' , lennart.borgman@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@jurta.org, dann@ics.uci.edu, 'Stefan Monnier' , storm@cua.dk, 'Alan Mackenzie' To: "'Miles Bader'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 21 05:07:06 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JS2i8-00074b-3T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 05:07:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JS2hd-0008Jo-4L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:06:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JS0VK-0004sK-MV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:45:42 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JS0VI-0004rv-3W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:45:42 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JS0VH-0004rs-TB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:45:39 -0500 Original-Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JS0VA-0003O4-Bw; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:45:32 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmgw2.us.oracle.com (rgmgw2.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.111]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id m1L1jFoe001656; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:45:15 -0700 Original-Received: from acsmt351.oracle.com (acsmt351.oracle.com [141.146.40.151]) by rgmgw2.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.2.4) with ESMTP id m1L1QqfH019713; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:45:09 -0700 Original-Received: from inet-141-146-46-1.oracle.com by acsmt351.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3583812341203558282; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:44:42 -0800 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/141.144.81.25) by bhmail.oracle.com (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:44:42 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Ach0HpLA8gEcWvA6SMWlSvsyrAdFlQABpOYA In-Reply-To: <87prurb20i.fsf@catnip.gol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:05:27 -0500 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:89777 Archived-At: > > Question: Is it important that the region stay active when > > you move point? If not, then perhaps (in t-m mode) we > > should always have point movement deactivate the region. > > Yes, in fact it's a basic tenent of tmm usage... People that are used > to tmm would be _extremely_ inconvenienced if movement deactivated the > mark. > > Remember: tmm is not cua-selection-mode. Oh, I know it's not cua-selection-mode, believe me. And I'm one of those regular tmm users. And I don't think I would mind such a change. But see my follow-up message. Instead of deactivating the region for point movements (I misspoke, in fact), I clarified (changed) my suggestion to simply not let C-SPC activate the region. The active region would still act as usual, and so would the inactive region. Those who use Emacs now without tmm mode would either continue without it or they might even like to try it. If they tried it, they could still use the region without it being activated. (I'm assuming non-nil `mark-even-if-inactive', by default.) Those, like me, who use tmm mode now would, I think, not miss the automatic region activation of C-SPC. I, at least, wouldn't mind doing C-x C-x (possibly twice) when I really needed the region to be active. Newbies would find something pretty familiar, even if in a slightly different form. Mouse selection would of course be pretty familiar to them. And they would eventually learn that they can activate (and make visible) the existing (invisible) region, for times when they don't want to use the mouse. Commands and contexts that need to differentiate between active and inactive region would still apply to the same use cases. I don't think plain C-SPC plus cursor movement today is such a case - for either camp of users. For those who don't use tmm, today's highlighting in that context is annoying. And I suspect that those who do use tmm don't take advantage of the fact that the region is active in that C-SPC-move-the-cursor context - even if they don't mind the highlighting. And even if they do take advantage of that, I suspect they wouldn't mind the low price of `C-x C-x' to activate the region. (But someone will set me straight, no doubt. ;-)) IOW, with my suggestion, the active region and its highlighting would be used only for contexts that, well, actually distinguish an active region from an inactive one. All other uses of the region and the mark would make use of an inactive region. When you really need the region to be active, you would need to activate it - no big deal. I use tmm (and delete-selection-mode), and I could live with that. As someone pointed out, when you need an active region you typically want to operate on a fairly big region. It's not as if you would be needing to activate the region each time you marked a word or a sexp, in order to operate on that region. Most operations can act on the region whether or not it is active. For those operations that require an active region (e.g. to distinguish from operating on the whole buffer), one or two `C-x C-x' is a small price to pay for getting rid of today's pervasive (and gratuitous) tmm highlighting from C-SPC activating the region. But, as I also said, I personally have no problem with the status quo wrt tmm and highlighting.