From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bob Rogers Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: C-x C-v considered harmful Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:45:27 -0400 Message-ID: <19035.61767.336003.105545@rgr.rgrjr.com> References: <19020.2798.523236.406366@rgr.rgrjr.com> <19025.11320.136726.700230@rgr.rgrjr.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 1247539548 8901 80.91.229.12 (14 Jul 2009 02:45:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 02:45:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 14 04:45:41 2009 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 1MQY1V-0001Wr-2R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:45:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42314 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MQY1U-0001Mw-6M for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:45:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MQY1P-0001Lo-Ku for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:45:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MQY1L-0001L9-61 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:45:35 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35057 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MQY1K-0001L6-WB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:45:31 -0400 Original-Received: from rgrjr.com ([216.146.47.5]:34409) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MQY1K-0006Xb-JI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:45:30 -0400 Original-Received: from rgrjr.dyndns.org (c-66-30-196-77.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [66.30.196.77]) by rgrjr.com (Postfix on CentOS) with ESMTP id B4ACD1600E3 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 02:45:28 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: (qmail 32271 invoked by uid 89); 14 Jul 2009 02:45:28 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO rgr.rgrjr.com) (192.168.57.1) by home with SMTP; 14 Jul 2009 02:45:28 -0000 Original-Received: by rgr.rgrjr.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 84CD24862E; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:45:27 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM viewmail-600 under 23.1.50.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:112437 Archived-At: From: Stefan Monnier Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 06:06:40 -0400 > I've just made C-x C-v obey confirm-nonexistent-file-or-buffer (as they > should have from the beginning) which should fix the OP's problem. > I'm sorry, but you seem to have misunderstood: My problem with C-x C-v > is its behavior in killing buffers, not in how it finds files. (That is > why I did not respond to your earlier post; as one who has never > *deliberately* invoked C-x C-v, I have no opinion.) But it does fix the OP's particular case because the RET would have asked to "[Confirm]" since here was no "d" file (or directory). Stefan This did not occur to me. But I notice that typing "C-x C-v d RET" fails to require a "[Confirm]" if the value of confirm-nonexistent-file-or-buffer is after-completion. Since this is the default, that is no help for those who have not yet been bitten by this problem. (It would in fact have helped me, as the OP, because I do set confirm-nonexistent-file-or-buffer to t, but I have been flogging this thread in the hope of making Emacs friendlier by default.) It is also unlikely to help if you had meant to type "C-x C-f" instead of "C-x C-v"; both commands behave the same, regardless of the confirm-nonexistent-file-or-buffer setting, up until the point the previous buffer is killed. And it doesn't help at all with the fact that even "C-x k" is skimpy in the warning department. Are you rejecting Drew's argument that it is really kill-buffer that needs attention (at least when invoked interactively)? -- Bob