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: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'. Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 21:07:50 +0200 Message-ID: <83vb98jqwp.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87vb98csu1.fsf@red-bean.com> <87h9kscqig.fsf@red-bean.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447268907 31312 80.91.229.3 (11 Nov 2015 19:08:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 19:08:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 11 20:08:17 2015 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 1Zwakh-0002Ff-Nu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 20:08:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42491 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zwakh-0001OW-FL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 14:08:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32867) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwakT-0001OI-LX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 14:08:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwakP-0005XO-Kd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 14:08:01 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:43239) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwakP-0005XE-Cm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 14:07:57 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NXN00100Z9XKN00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 21:07:56 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NXN0013WZT7GI70@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 21:07:55 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <87h9kscqig.fsf@red-bean.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.175 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:194120 Archived-At: > From: Karl Fogel > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:58:15 -0600 > Cc: Artur Malabarba > > John Wiegley writes: > >>>>>> Karl Fogel writes: > > > >>> 3. I think, when electric-indent-mode is on, open-line should indent the > >>> line that was created below if it isn't empty. May I go ahead? > > > >> Had I seen that question at the time, I would have answered "Oh, please > >> don't" :-). But maybe mine is a minority opinion? I encounter the new > >> behavior several times a day, and don't like it; turning off > >> `electric-indent-mode' seems like a drastic solution. But if people > >> generally like this new behavior, I'll certainly live with being in the > >> minority and figure out the appropritae local customization. > > > >I too would want the original C-o behavior. If you're using it an column 0, > >then the action of C-o is to create a new line, not to adjust indentation of > >the line you were on before the command. > > > >Now, you *could* have the new behavior using `electric-indent-functions', > >checking if the current command is `open-line'. So we're not making it > >impossible to do. But we shouldn't change long-standing behavior like this, in > >a subtle way that many users wouldn't know how to undo. > > Yeah, my feelings too. If `electric-indent-mode' does anything here, it should move point to the appropriate indentation column *on the new, blank line*, while leaving existing text however it was. People who don't like electric-indent-mode can just turn it off, can't they? Why argue about defaults when they can be so easily changed?