From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Alfred M. Szmidt" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: cc-mode adds newlines Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:46:51 +0100 Message-ID: <1101073611.808535.23395.nullmailer@Update.UU.SE> References: <20041121122629.GE20436@apps.cwi.nl> <20041121142946.GO20436@apps.cwi.nl> <1101063835.549340.23229.nullmailer@Update.UU.SE> <20041121211900.GA25181@apps.cwi.nl> Reply-To: ams@kemisten.nu NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1101073668 2225 80.91.229.6 (21 Nov 2004 21:47:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:47:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-cc-mode@gnu.org, acm@muc.de, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 21 22:47:37 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CVzYX-0000Rw-00 for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:47:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CVzhY-0002cG-47 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:56:56 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CVzhM-0002bx-PK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:56:44 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CVzhL-0002bL-Ic for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:56:43 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CVzhL-0002bI-FY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:56:43 -0500 Original-Received: from [130.238.4.153] (helo=pernis.its.uu.se) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CVzXv-0002p4-RX; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:47:00 -0500 Original-Received: by pernis.its.uu.se (Postfix, from userid 205) id EE96B455; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:46:58 +0100 (MEZ) Original-Received: from pernis.its.uu.se(127.0.0.1) by pernis.its.uu.se via virus-scan id s355; Sun, 21 Nov 04 22:46:52 +0100 Original-Received: from Psilocybe.Update.UU.SE (Psilocybe.Update.UU.SE [130.238.19.25]) by pernis.its.uu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF3C8142; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:46:52 +0100 (MEZ) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Psilocybe.Update.UU.SE (Postfix) with ESMTP id B689338015; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:46:52 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from Psilocybe.Update.UU.SE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Psilocybe [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 15894-05; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:46:52 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from Update.UU.SE (Lem.Update.UU.SE [130.238.19.73]) by Psilocybe.Update.UU.SE (Postfix) with SMTP; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:46:52 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: (nullmailer pid 23396 invoked by uid 30270); Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:46:51 -0000 Original-To: Andries Brouwer In-reply-to: <20041121211900.GA25181@apps.cwi.nl> (message from Andries Brouwer on Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:19:01 +0100) 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: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:30210 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:30210 The current setup is broken because it does things behind the user's back. Get of your high horse, the current setup is broken according to _you_, I like the current setup. If you do not like it, you can fix it in your .emacs. I won't be trying to start useless discussions if the defaults do change, since I will just edit my .emacs and I will continue to be a happy person. The only broken thing might be the implementation, having require-final-newline to be a alist of modes where you want to have final newlines would be a good thing. Maybe you would like to add such a feature? Thus, so far you never stated that you actually do want a c-require-final-newline different from require-final-newline, more or less contradicting the part you quote here. There is no contradiction, _some_ people might want it. It happens that for me they are the same.