From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Suggestion: two new commands: beginning-of-list and end-of-list Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 18:48:32 +0300 Message-ID: <86plpbtsq7.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86le00ve01.fsf@gnu.org> <86jzfjvj98.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="6920"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: arthur miller Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 10 17:49:18 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1so37E-0001aM-R2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:49:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1so36a-0000mY-7H; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 11:48:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1so36Y-0000m6-4y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 11:48:34 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1so36X-0000mB-Rn; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 11:48:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=P7nGOWjiYxrm2eG9HZ6/eufkbkpZbYonRlrEelngjs4=; b=lpznN+oPB/jp vgKY9mF+cqaLTn9/i3ADUOnmnfanN2AASaWTbXZx2r30W85AQVcGRo0acneAS9gyoW2LU8i93BczL NDShXep5qjM8LA1iyFtwv/6s0puSvBNJvQUFpDffv91Nq+t8anNsjWfRl1oeKGx85ydZgVm9RgS0K 2yVi+fC0b+1tPCf//GKrTjMpvsA442C6VbNy4JD/RGOWKpmPBm+ecKSzD+taoOCIimwv0MwNfexO7 abpwD0hjlOg57dJZwtofIfFZVzUSUNyA+FA/tGjkRvJdzK1R8UQfOQ/yD/cNlXwJVn50Vijz8l8yu R3Xx7RcGeVsjGG6tVNFS/g==; In-Reply-To: (message from arthur miller on Tue, 10 Sep 2024 15:10:26 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:323529 Archived-At: > From: arthur miller > CC: "emacs-devel@gnu.org" > Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 15:10:26 +0000 > > >> I think it makes sense to keep backward-up-list as it is, since it handles > >> literal strings as it does. But the behaviour is controlled via special vars > >> esape-strings and no-syntax-crossing. If we want similar command as > >> beginning-of-string, we have to wrap it and let-bind those variables to > >> change how it works. > > > >Yes, but is that a problem? > > Everyone who would like to customize it has to write their own. Why would someone want to customize a command that does its job well? > >The converse of C-M-u is C-M-d, but it doesn't move to the end of a > >list, it moves _inside_ one level. > > Down-list? I don't think it is close to the end-of-list. Try it on a deeply-nested list, and you will see the difference.