From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: tags-loop-continue Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:18:11 +0300 Message-ID: <56928443.2020603@yandex.ru> References: <83wprimto9.fsf@gnu.org> <56916C10.6050004@yandex.ru> <83oacumqmj.fsf@gnu.org> <56917246.1010800@yandex.ru> <5691795E.9010008@yandex.ru> <83lh7ym725.fsf@gnu.org> <5691D768.3020908@yandex.ru> <5b7c961c-e5ff-4ca2-bb26-dfc1d1e60d7f@default> <56926C23.6000708@yandex.ru> <838u3xmn80.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1452442717 5612 80.91.229.3 (10 Jan 2016 16:18:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:18:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 10 17:18:30 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aIIhK-0008E2-EU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 17:18:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47587 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aIIhJ-00048x-Hl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:18:29 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38363) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aIIh6-000481-N3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:18:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aIIh3-0005J5-Fi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:18:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-lf0-x22b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::22b]:36459) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aIIh3-0005It-8O; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:18:13 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-lf0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id h129so5452271lfh.3; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 08:18:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3U5L9+AQhmFx1pTvyszoeYfuJk5Wka4fqcknsQxd2z4=; b=aBQ/K3DFca4mQ2SJz2E5ZaU6kE4t0yVMC+j2ljNFnHLFR1UBqJdXGviOBa61hbC7FN iGoVRQpUU8Gsex/LQBra9jPgCJLeZrycmrKE5HAYjoYRjgQ1VoN22NJMB6iPoyb+7aWe qzQ2OiSdRItuhR6MqicET+NJnrudRBf9dvYXDN01SDmCKZo7BCkoC5pQAlzr4u6LPFdC m/CRO9c0buc0qdlVoreUKxcV5EJJS643lfnXIWqL09QsGUG07cGKYzc2jEUiC0EHs/t6 +v91wzwccQEX6m/lyBC/sTcOzBtk9E1Qbpb5/WU9XUuF+QOcpdgputvZEeO2/X5bH24g OVSg== X-Received: by 10.25.87.195 with SMTP id l186mr33440765lfb.120.1452442692648; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 08:18:12 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.190] ([178.252.127.222]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id qb3sm20065289lbb.39.2016.01.10.08.18.11 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 10 Jan 2016 08:18:11 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:43.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/43.0 In-Reply-To: <838u3xmn80.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c07::22b X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:197980 Archived-At: On 01/10/2016 07:08 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Those commands are very deficient without tags-loop-continue. The > idea is that you iterate through many files, doing whatever you do in > each one of them. If you cannot continue the loop, these commands are > so much less convenient as to be almost useless. Ok, I agree we should provide some access to it. > We cannot decide that commands are unimportant just because no one > yells the moment we make such changes. Not the moment we made that change, nor in the months that have passed since. > These are powerful commands, > and it's quite expected that they are not used every day. It doesn't > mean they are not used at all, or that they can be removed or ignored. A command that isn't used every day can afford to have a less convenient binding, or have its binding changed sometimes. > Ahem... if the documentation update was done back when the code > changes were made, we would be having this discussion in time, instead > of doing this now. That's beside the point. The lack of user complaints so far is a strong data point.