From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `*' interactive spec in some text-killing functions Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 00:20:38 +0200 Message-ID: <85sl8b4t6x.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <85bqf0649m.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <86ps3gy02e.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <86lke4xz7z.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <200706281521.l5SFLTEI008310@jane.dms.auburn.edu> <7dbe73ed0706281507sf061363h3095cbb3f97df610@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1183069259 9905 80.91.229.12 (28 Jun 2007 22:20:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:20:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juanma Barranquero , Luc Teirlinck , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Mathias Dahl" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 29 00:20:57 2007 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 4.50) id 1I42M8-0001Ww-RQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 00:20:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I42M4-0005jc-31 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:20:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I42M0-0005hH-PQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:20:44 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I42M0-0005gX-9P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:20:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I42M0-0005gQ-2X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:20:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-12.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.52]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I42Lz-0008A3-ME for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:20:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-08-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-08-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.20]) by mail-in-12.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC2774CBD9; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 00:20:41 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from mail-in-05.arcor-online.net (mail-in-05.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.45]) by mail-in-08-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9635B212FB7; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 00:20:41 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-025-219.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.25.219]) by mail-in-05.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 671A21C3321; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 00:20:41 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id EE8031D03440; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 00:20:38 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <7dbe73ed0706281507sf061363h3095cbb3f97df610@mail.gmail.com> (Mathias Dahl's message of "Fri\, 29 Jun 2007 00\:07\:16 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.90.3/3547/Thu Jun 28 23:10:57 2007 on mail-in-05.arcor-online.net X-Virus-Status: Clean X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 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:74022 Archived-At: "Mathias Dahl" writes: >> This discussion ceased to be about technical matters very soon... > > But it was amusing, a bit like a ping pong match... :) I don't see that I succeeded soliciting the ping, though not for lack of trying. > A defadvice, like you suggested yourself, seems to be the win-win > solution here. You are happy, David is happy and this means we all > are happy :) If I understood Juanma correctly (actually, rather unlikely), he had a particular application where toggling overwrite-mode in read-only buffers was causing him problems. I have no clue what problems, and I have been completely unable to coerce him into producing any argument that would make me get his point. While he accuses me that I wanted to convince him of being mistaken or whatever, in fact I was rather begging to be convinced, to no avail. I have seen _nothing_ from him that I would have considered a plausible basis for his wish. Plausible in that it would explain to me why _he_ considers his proposal a good idea, never mind whether _I_ would come to different conclusions from the same basis. But I completely fail to see what could make him (never mind myself) consider his proposal a worthwhile idea. It's not just that I have a different opinion: I don't _understand_ his position at all. It is completely void of any purpose I can discern. I am just _baffled_. Whatever. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum