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: Ibuffer: w and B default to buffer at current line Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 22:25:06 +0300 Message-ID: <83vaxuib1p.fsf@gnu.org> References: < >> <<83intw5our.fsf@gnu.org>> <3dbc0c03-56f9-4b6f-bd3b-258458967665@default> > <<83zin630i9.fsf@gnu.org>> <024f1fd0-80ee-4780-bebb-c935959851bc@default> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1474140340 6448 195.159.176.226 (17 Sep 2016 19:25:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 19:25:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jwiegley@gmail.com, tino.calancha@gmail.com, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 17 21:25:36 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 1blLEz-0000q8-Qf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 21:25:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47207 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blLEy-0001Uu-3H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:25:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33963) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blLEQ-0001Ty-KK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:24:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blLEP-0005Iw-MN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:24:58 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:58019) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blLEL-0005Gq-Tf; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:24:53 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2379 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1blLEK-0003m3-25; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:24:52 -0400 In-reply-to: <024f1fd0-80ee-4780-bebb-c935959851bc@default> (message from Drew Adams on Sat, 17 Sep 2016 11:47:35 -0700 (PDT)) 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:207503 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 11:47:35 -0700 (PDT) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, tino.calancha@gmail.com > > > > When it comes to UI, I'm in complete agreement with Eli: I love DWIM > > > behavior, and think this is a virtue of Emacs, not a vice in any way. > > > > If DWIM is okay in the UI, then functions that behave in support of > > that UI should also be okay. > > Yes, of course. But as I pointed out, the case at hand has > nothing to do with DWIM. I disagree.