From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Visual cleanup for customize buffers Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:19:17 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <200601160419.k0G4JGv09689@raven.dms.auburn.edu> References: <200601122345.k0CNjx114407@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200601131418.k0DEIld23354@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200601150140.k0F1eaD23641@raven.dms.auburn.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1137385375 17047 80.91.229.2 (16 Jan 2006 04:22:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:22:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, storm@cua.dk Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 16 05:22:52 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EyLtL-0004Hw-NO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 05:22:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EyLvc-0004Hz-8S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:25:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EyLvH-0004Fe-D1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:24:51 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EyLvG-0004Ee-KL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:24:50 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EyLvG-0004ES-EW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:24:50 -0500 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1EyLyY-0004ys-6N; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:28:14 -0500 Original-Received: from raven.dms.auburn.edu (raven.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.29]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.13.3+Sun/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k0G4MADn017786; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:22:10 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by raven.dms.auburn.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7) id k0G4JGv09689; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:19:17 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-reply-to: (rms@gnu.org) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.1 (manatee.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.104]); Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:22:10 -0600 (CST) 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:49159 Archived-At: Richard Stallman wrote: I suggest a different solution: don't allow hiding a setting that is in state "SET". That would be bad, because unlike EDITED items, SET items can _start out_ hidden when the group is first visited. If you unhide them, you should be able to hide them again without warning. There is _no way_ that these whole buffer buttons (in multi-option buffers) can operate in a sensible way with respect to SET items, hidden or not. The user could have set these items using the menu bar Options item or using `M-x customize-set-variable', without any intent to save them (both mark the item SET). But after quite a while, he searches for another item, which, by coincidence, turns out to be in the same group as one or more of the items he has set outside any Custom buffer. The group is huge, so he does not see this. He saves the one item he wants to save and inadvertently also saves the items he only wanted to set temporarily. The above is a way worse and way more likely problem than the user hiding an option he has set with a state button. Nobody knowing how to use a State button is going to use the whole buffer buttons in multi-option buffers anyway. If they do, and they hid an item, it most likely is because they did not want to save it, certainly if the text above the whole buffer buttons clearly points out that HIDDEN items will not be saved. Just clearly stating above the whole buffer buttons that they do not apply to HIDDEN items should, for now, eliminate user confusion about hidden items. Solving the other, more likely, problem I pointed out above could be discussed after the release. Maybe, after the release, it would be better to replace the current set of six whole buffer buttons with three: "Save Edited Items" "Undo Edits" "Kill buffer" "Save Edited Items" is analogous to "Apply", "Kill Buffer" to "Cancel" in other applications. I do not believe that there is a need in Emacs for the "OK" of other applications (which means "Save Edited Items and Kill Buffer"). As the name says, "Save Edited Items" would only save EDITED items. I believe that this is a lot safer for beginning users who are likely to have set items with the menu bar. If they want to save items set with the menu bar, they should use "Save Options" from the Menu bar. If they want to save items they have set with a State button, they should save them with the State button. If the whole buffer buttons _only_ affect EDITED items, then there is no problem with hidden options, because EDITED items can not be HIDDEN. Sincerely, Luc.