From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New multi-command facility displays in the wrong echo area. Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 17:03:28 +0300 Message-ID: <837dru2pfz.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20201009163445.GB4027@ACM> <20201009203810.GC4027@ACM> <83imbi609a.fsf@gnu.org> <20201010103233.GB5662@ACM> <834kn25o6b.fsf@gnu.org> <20201010124446.GC5662@ACM> <831ri65jpc.fsf@gnu.org> <83zh4u44mx.fsf@gnu.org> <83imbg4yl3.fsf@gnu.org> <837drv4ij6.fsf@gnu.org> <83mu0r3030.fsf@gnu.org> <83ft6j2wep.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="16409"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acm@muc.de, juri@linkov.net, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 13 16:04:14 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kSKuT-00048J-Hy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 16:04:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48210 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kSKuS-0006iz-IA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 10:04:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53364) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kSKtn-0006Gj-6s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 10:03:31 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:35871) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kSKtk-0005rX-Pu; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 10:03:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3985 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kSKtd-0004eL-Ok; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 10:03:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Gregory Heytings on Mon, 12 Oct 2020 21:06:12 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:257532 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 21:06:12 +0000 > From: Gregory Heytings > cc: acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, juri@linkov.net > > > Unless we can come up with a change that is either simple or safe. Or > > if we decide that the current situation is so unacceptable that we are > > willing to take higher risks of releasing a less stable Emacs 27.2. > > > > I cannot make such a judgment. But I think options should at least be > explored. That goes without saying. > Would doing something like what eldoc-minibuffer-message does > possibly be a good solution? It seems to me that this is safer than the > current situation, as it does not fiddle with the minibuffer contents. > If so, what do you (and others) think of the following: I personally feel that moving echo-area messages to the mode line is too drastic a change to make it by default, and certainly in a minor release. But let's hear wjat others think, and what other ideas will be brought up. > (defvar minibuffer-message-mode-line-string nil) > (setq minibuffer-message-clear-timeout 3) This seem to make the message clear automatically after a 3-sec timeout? If so, this is also a change in behavior wrt what 'message' does: the current behavior is to clear the message only when an input event comes in, the timeout is optional and off by default. > > I cannot help you with your doubts more than I already did. If you > > still have those doubts, I'd appreciate if you keep them to yourself, > > because having them written here is an insult I don't think I deserve. > > > > Where do you see an insult in what I wrote? That you publicly accuse me of not evaluating your proposal properly, based on nothing but your tendency to doubt (and the fact that I disagreed with your opinions).