From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: tags-loop-continue Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:01:35 +0200 Message-ID: <8337u5mf74.fsf@gnu.org> 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> <83bn8tmnvq.fsf@gnu.org> <56928356.2000609@yandex.ru> <8360z1mkfc.fsf@gnu.org> <5692A0AF.8030301@yandex.ru> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1452452516 21343 80.91.229.3 (10 Jan 2016 19:01:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:01:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 10 20:01:51 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 1aILFM-0000yr-Fm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 20:01:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48685 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aILFL-0005eD-Ou for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:01:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51008) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aILF9-0005dl-UE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:01:36 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aILF6-00048W-PI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:01:35 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:48397) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aILF6-00048R-Lt; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:01:32 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3235 helo=HOME-C4E4A596F7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aILF5-00020W-S9; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:01:32 -0500 In-reply-to: <5692A0AF.8030301@yandex.ru> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:19:27 +0300) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:197995 Archived-At: > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:19:27 +0300 > > >> On the flip side, the users may get confused that M-, is bound to > >> different commands in different contexts. > > > > But the current binding of M-, makes no sense while tags-search is > > on-going, I think. So it sounds like a good compromise to me. > > I suppose. My main concern is that someone can get used to M-, being > bound to tags-loop-continue, and then use this key combination outside > of tags-search, to an entirely different result. Could be, but I think it's a lower probability than someone using it as part of tags-search. So doing this is progress, I think. Thanks.