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: dired mode recursive delete Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:03:27 +0200 Message-ID: <864plcxovk.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <87d50i42h3.fsf@escher.local.home> <85veea18r6.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <8664668904.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1181721834 31002 80.91.229.12 (13 Jun 2007 08:03:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 08:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Kevin Rodgers Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 13 10:03:52 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 1HyNpV-0007PS-5j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:03:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HyNpU-0002xM-Og for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:03:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HyNpH-0002tw-27 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:03:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HyNpF-0002tX-WD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:03:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HyNpF-0002tP-Lv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:03:33 -0400 Original-Received: from pc3.berlin.powerweb.de ([62.67.228.11]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HyNpE-0004yH-SC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:03:33 -0400 Original-Received: from quinscape.de (dslnet.212-29-44.ip210.dokom.de [212.29.44.210] (may be forged)) by pc3.berlin.powerweb.de (8.9.3p3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA02411 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:03:28 +0200 X-Delivered-To: Original-Received: (qmail 7315 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2007 08:03:27 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO lola.quinscape.zz) ([10.0.3.43]) (envelope-sender ) by ns.quinscape.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 13 Jun 2007 08:03:27 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id BE8AF8FA36; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:03:27 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Kevin Rodgers's message of "Wed\, 13 Jun 2007 01\:53\:31 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.51 (gnu/linux) 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:72741 Archived-At: Kevin Rodgers writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> Kevin Rodgers writes: >> >>> Richard Stallman wrote: >>>> Setting it to t instead will not cause _any_ action without asking for >>>> individual confirmation for every non-empty directory. It seems like >>>> quite a safe setting (whereas the original setting is not helpful in >>>> any situation I can think of). >>>> >>>> My personal setting is 'top which is certainly more convenient than t >>>> but might be considered too drastic as a default setting by some. >>>> >>>> I think that `top' would be an ok default. >>>> Let's change the default in the trunk. >>> I'm uneasy about `top' vs. t as the default: when I'm prompted >>> "Recursive delete of SUBDIR? ", I expect that if I answer "yes" >>> that I'll be prompted for SUBDIR's subdirectories as well. >> >> That is not taking issue with the default but rather with the prompt. >> What kind of prompt would make you expect the right thing? > > Recursive delete of SUBDIR (unconditionally)? > Recursive delete of SUBDIR (without confirmation)? How about like Completely delete SUBDIR? I think it would be clear enough that this would ask no further (=recursive) questions and include subdirectories. It has the advantage of being less verbose, leaving more space for the directory name. -- David Kastrup