From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#2270: [PATCH] bug#2270, RE: 23.0.90; find-library:... (2) other-window version Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 12:38:51 -0700 Message-ID: <07346487C61E40D891C856C44C06986E@us.oracle.com> References: <871vu5d7y9.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1351107615 16093 80.91.229.3 (24 Oct 2012 19:40:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:40:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 2270@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, 2270@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Stefan Monnier'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 24 21:40:22 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1TR6oQ-00085c-9H for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 21:40:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56515 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TR6oH-0001B9-3T for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:40:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41282) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TR6oE-0001B3-4i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:40:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TR6oA-0004TL-1A for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:40:10 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:49777) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TR6o9-0004M2-TT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:40:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TR6q2-0001EN-33 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:42:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:42:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 2270 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 2270-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B2270.13511076624659 (code B ref 2270); Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:42:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 2270) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Oct 2012 19:41:02 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60026 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TR6p4-0001D5-DJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:41:02 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com ([148.87.113.117]:48533) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TR6p2-0001CW-9u; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:41:01 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by rcsinet15.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id q9OJcrG1023735 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:38:54 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt358.oracle.com (acsmt358.oracle.com [141.146.40.158]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q9OJcqGn025943 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:38:53 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt103.oracle.com (abhmt103.oracle.com [141.146.116.55]) by acsmt358.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q9OJcq9s030234; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 14:38:52 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/130.35.178.248) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 12:38:52 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: Ac2yGDdHub5FFHGeS0O/7FiBWnCXuAABDdvA X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:65999 Archived-At: > > I repeat my suggestion to add command `find-library-other-window'. > > As mentioned in other threads, I'd rather we add a "use other > window for next command" prefix command (which we could bind > to C-x 4), I could live with adding yet another such foo-other-window > command since we don't yet have such a prefix command. Yes, please add it while waiting for your ideal to bless the planet. ;-) > > I also suggest that it be bound by default to `C-x 4 l'. > > Since find-library is not bound to any key, I don't think > find-library-other-window should be bound either. "Since"? The one doesn't follow from the other. There is no logical reason why we cannot have one command bound and not the other. It depends on what we expect the most common uses to be. I proposed a key for the other-window version because I don't think the same-window version is very useful. But that's me. In any case, FWIW, I disagree that this should not be bound by default. But if you are coming from the point of view that things must follow your proposed new _implementation_, then such a hard-and-fast rule pretty much follows, I'm guessing. In spite of the fact that it might not be useful/needed in all cases. Hammer therefore nail? > > I've used this command & key forever, and wouldn't be without it. > > (And I rarely have a need anymore for same-window `find-library'.) > > In my experience, people rarely need both the "same-window" and the > "other-window" forms of a command, indeed. Disagree, as one of the "people". In this case, yes (this person rarely uses the same-window version of this particular command). But not in general. I use BOTH versions of most same- and other-window commands. You keep repeating that supposition, BTW, but so far haven't provided any data backing it up. I, for one, would find it hard to believe that many people use only `C-x C-f' or `C-x 4 f', but not both. Perhaps this too is hammer therefore nail? Does your proposed implementation perhaps require a user to opt for one or the other for all uses? Whatever. I have the command/key for my own use.