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: Emacs bug #23794; sort-line behavior regressed from prior Emacs versions Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 18:18:29 +0300 Message-ID: <83vb158awq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83shwa9zmr.fsf@gnu.org> <83lh229ywc.fsf@gnu.org> <83inx69xcx.fsf@gnu.org> <0984ce22-cbcf-42a6-906e-a03b65f3c71c@default> <8360t5aolu.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1466349553 31242 80.91.229.3 (19 Jun 2016 15:19:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 15:19:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rswgnu@gmail.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jun 19 17:19:12 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 1bEeVD-00032M-7j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 17:19:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39026 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bEeVC-0004B2-Bx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 11:19:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39463) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bEeV4-00049L-RP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 11:19:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bEeUz-0006FU-EA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 11:19:01 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:54066) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bEeUz-0006FK-AE; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 11:18:57 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2595 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bEeUe-000109-2Y; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 11:18:37 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Robert Weiner on Sun, 19 Jun 2016 09:31:14 -0400) 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:204517 Archived-At: > From: Robert Weiner > Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 09:31:14 -0400 > Cc: Drew Adams , Richard Stallman , > emacs-devel > > The proposal was to make it the only behavior. > > That was how the patch was written but it could easily be changed if the core team will just say what would be > acceptable. Do you want a new option variable that can be used by multiple functions to pay attention to or > ignore invisible newlines with a default that would be the same as things work now? Or would you like just an > optional flag for sort-lines that outline modes could use to minimize any change? Then we can move on to > other things. As I wrote, I'd very much prefer a solution that only affects outline-mode and its descendants. In those modes, ignoring invisible lines could be the default behavior. I think we should also provide a defcustom to make sort-lines behave in outline modes as it does today, because, although I agree that the current behavior makes less sense in those modes, it's nonetheless a valid use case that we should not disallow completely. As for modes that are not descendants of outline-mode, the default should IMO stay as it is now. Whether we want an option to make sort-lines disregard invisible text in those other modes is something I have no opinion about, and won't object if patches to that effect are submitted. Thanks.