From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dired: Improve symmetry in mark/unmark commands bound to keys Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 22:02:43 +0300 Message-ID: <83bmzacwmk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <877fa12iyq.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <83h995ay04.fsf@gnu.org> <87y42h13pi.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <83fuopax4g.fsf@gnu.org> <87twd512pk.fsf@linux-m68k.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1474916621 22445 195.159.176.226 (26 Sep 2016 19:03:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:03:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: schwab@linux-m68k.org, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tino Calancha Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 26 21:03:37 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bobBQ-0003NZ-SX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 21:03:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46230 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bobBP-00057m-2S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 15:03:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41551) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bobBI-00057g-Tv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 15:03:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bobBD-0005Ak-RX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 15:03:11 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:49307) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bobBD-0005Ag-Oy; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 15:03:07 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1350 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bobBA-0004Jr-RL; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 15:03:07 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Tino Calancha on Tue, 27 Sep 2016 01:30:35 +0900 (JST)) 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: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:207820 Archived-At: > From: Tino Calancha > Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 01:30:35 +0900 (JST) > > > I believe Eli has proposed a solution that offers a middle ground. Can we move > > to discussing that? > Yes, we can talk about that. > Eli suggestion would be consistent with Dired if, for instance: > I) C-u * . el RET > ;; unmark > II) C-u C-u * . el RET > ;; prompt for the marker char. FWIW, I'm okay with this. > I mean, we should not invert the number of C-u's in I) II) Indeed, no need. Thanks.