Re: Should undefined behavior be encouraged in Emacs?

[Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>]

On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 10:12:53PM +0200, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@online.de> writes:

> > for me transient-mark-mode in connection with a mark set is enough.

> Oh, are we having this discussion again?

> I, like (I'm assuming) all other oldey-timey Emacs users :-), disabled
> `transient-mark-mode' the first chance I got.  And the reason for that
> is that `C-x C-x' activates the region, which makes it impossible to use
> that command to jump around in buffers.  Which I do constantly.

Yep, me too.  I disabled it in my .emacs in Emacs-22, disabling the
monstrosity before it happended.  Trouble is, I still have to do testing
in emacs -Q.  :-(

I detest the way it splurges blue ink over carefully crafted font
locking.  I hate the introduction of modal behaviour into Emacs as
default; it makes Emacs a bit like vi.  Oh, and the dishonest naming -
there is nothing left of `transient-mark-mode' because the mark is not
transient any longer, given that `mark-active-even-when-inactive' (???)
is set by default.

> If that rather odd overloading of the `C-x C-x' command went away, I
> might start using `transient-mark-mode'.

Thank [insert your god's name here] options can be set in Emacs.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).