From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David De La Harpe Golden Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: line-move-visual never set to nil? Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 22:23:25 +0100 Message-ID: <488F8A4D.20905@harpegolden.net> References: <18571.25125.311010.324079@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <87od4k1nj5.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <1F7E32D0-7C19-4950-94DB-F6CD33A56EB0@gmail.com> <6161f3180807290043l2b0cc1as85a338204687f183@mail.gmail.com> <87y73kbvz3.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87ej5c8rua.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <5E39B0DD-4DB4-4DBF-9640-598A059E6F76@gmail.com> <87ej5cxzvy.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1217366630 18571 80.91.229.12 (29 Jul 2008 21:23:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 21:23:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: David Reitter , raman@users.sourceforge.net, Stefan Monnier , "Andrew W. Nosenko" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 29 23:24:39 2008 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 1KNwgQ-0006ss-7Y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:24:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43399 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KNwfV-0003uk-TK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:23:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KNwfR-0003uY-6U for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:23:37 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KNwfQ-0003uL-2Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:23:36 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34851 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KNwfP-0003uI-Td for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:23:35 -0400 Original-Received: from harpegolden.net ([65.99.215.13]:55988) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KNwfP-0003JS-Kt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:23:35 -0400 Original-Received: from golden1.harpegolden.net (unknown [86.45.2.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "David De La Harpe Golden", Issuer "David De La Harpe Golden Personal CA rev 3" (verified OK)) by harpegolden.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A845E82A6; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 21:23:32 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080724) In-Reply-To: <87ej5cxzvy.fsf@stupidchicken.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:101720 Archived-At: Chong Yidong wrote: > David Reitter writes: > >> How about new functions for the visual movement, and binding the arrow >> keys to that? > > No, we shouldn't make C-n and down do different things. That would be > bad. > How about making new functions for the visual movement, and binding different keys to _them_ : Since visual line movement is occasionally useful, but nonsurprising keyboard macros probably more important for my usual use of emacs, I was vaguely considering doing that locally, effectively - leaving line-move-visual on, BUT binding up/down and C-n/p to next/previous-logical-line, and putting the (visual) next/previous-line on M-up/down (yes perhaps trouble on some terminals, but my terminal seems to handle it okay) But if next/previous-line were what next/previous-logical-line currently are, and next/previous-visual-line were introduced to be what next/previous-line currently are, I'd probably prefer that. Slightly less surprising than having to use next/prev-logical-line where next/previous-line used to suffice.