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: arrow keys vs. C-f/b/n/p Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:27:16 +0300 Message-ID: <83fx0slhxn.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87d3w2ncqs.fsf_-_@lola.goethe.zz> <87iq5py7xk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1276334899 21025 80.91.229.12 (12 Jun 2010 09:28:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 09:28:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, dak@gnu.org, cloos@jhcloos.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 12 11:28:15 2010 connect(): No such file or directory 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ONN0e-00071f-S5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:28:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48428 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ONN0e-0006gz-4x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:28:12 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=49714 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ONN0W-0006f2-Ms for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:28:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ONN0V-0000nz-LN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:28:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:58358) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ONN0U-0000nZ-2L; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:28:02 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0L3W00400A5UPV00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:27:16 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.119.36]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0L3W00LAFA9FY6D0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:27:16 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) 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:125791 Archived-At: > From: Lennart Borgman > Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 19:09:44 +0200 > Cc: Chong Yidong , Eli Zaretskii , David Kastrup , > emacs-devel@gnu.org > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 6:29 PM, James Cloos wrote: > > > > In Openoffice.org, the arrow keys move logically. > > Seems like a mistake to me. What is the mistake? What do you think James described by the above sentence? > I think switching the visual directions of the arrow will interfere > badly because using them is most certainly in low level memory (body > memory) in the user. What program do you think switched the visual directions of the arrow keys? Emacs doesn't do that: the key moves to the right, and the key moves to the left. (They didn't, before I made the changes in the bindings of the arrow keys.)