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: FW: commands to select things of different kinds Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 13:35:27 -0700 Message-ID: <001701c8a25c$e7be2bb0$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> References: <004a01c8a1a0$7215cdd0$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <878wz9btq8.fsf@jurta.org> 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 1208637358 21941 80.91.229.12 (19 Apr 2008 20:35:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:35:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Emacs-Devel' To: "'Juri Linkov'" , "'Stefan Monnier'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 19 22:36:32 2008 connect(): Connection refused 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 1JnJnP-0001c3-VX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 22:36:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JnJmk-0007sm-R2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:35:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JnJmf-0007sh-TS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:35:41 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JnJme-0007sV-J4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:35:41 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JnJme-0007sS-FY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:35:40 -0400 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 1JnJme-0000YM-99 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:35:40 -0400 Original-Received: from agmgw2.us.oracle.com (agmgw2.us.oracle.com [152.68.180.213]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id m3JKZZlL002320; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 14:35:35 -0600 Original-Received: from acsmt351.oracle.com (acsmt351.oracle.com [141.146.40.151]) by agmgw2.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.0/Switch-3.2.0) with ESMTP id m3JJUr6L010435; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 14:35:34 -0600 Original-Received: from inet-141-146-46-1.oracle.com by acsmt351.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3655321881208637315; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 13:35:15 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/141.144.88.148) by bhmail.oracle.com (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 13:35:15 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <878wz9btq8.fsf@jurta.org> Thread-Index: AciiWpH72XJGP1QnT1mz2xVOYMiNTgAAD1iQ 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-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:95473 Archived-At: > > I use C-M-SPC *very* often, typically just before C-y (together with > > a variant of delete-selection-mode). > > BTW, since now shift-selection is available by default, I > think we should > enable delete-selection-mode, because otherwise it is very confusing > for users coming from other programs to discover the weird behavior > of transient-mark-mode when delete-selection-mode is disabled. Here we go again... Can you please start a different thread for that? This thread is _not at all_ about whether delete-selection-mode or t-m-mode should be enabled by default. This thread is about some proposed commands that let you mark various things at or near point. And which keys might be bound to those commands is a secondary consideration, relevant only if the commands are accepted. There is nothing in the proposal about using C-M-SPC or any other keys, in particular. It's about the commands. If the commands are accepted, then we can argue endlessly about which keys, if any, to bind to them.