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: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2024 17:43:45 +0300 Message-ID: <86tth7c0ri.fsf@gnu.org> References: <875xto7lbn.fsf@dancol.org> <87o77g5t1h.fsf@yahoo.com> <864j97dig8.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17149"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, dancol@dancol.org, stefankangas@gmail.com To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 02 16:44:07 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 1sOejn-0004Fi-2j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 16:44:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sOejY-0007Gs-Aq; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 10:43:52 -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 1sOejX-0007GE-E9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 10:43:51 -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 1sOejW-0006nS-LM; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 10:43:50 -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=7E2JIiva4OJXlSOFJa9AOxrh0YvLyZy0gOKnLuu3How=; b=gbvpsL2O6dBp tVXYTb3x6VB3YhsgRRlqy/C05KPLmZsXjofaZlXHmjBM+qWn9+9AFPamkyq+bFCNXD8QrrS/d7DAx vAGg6vR1JIWlf9MYNRG42VD7QB3oCaET636yLmQuIu861qJ+3WAia2VS60aAJcB6dK6TKaXGUTlHo Nkhm10NpYvch1diwx6ld5shdEsnQv9hUoMew7oRNbBcMr64jikfi8QlEfG12aoZ+kUPdmw4Vru30P TqW3Ow5+nx6+iXZTMbeuIkpjWnbyZC1Lh/5fVu+KIIiq/lT2JkoyMWFbAFk+MWwOrR6lyRnB6wPPl a1w95cyL+Vrzv7CN7oancA==; In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Monnier on Tue, 02 Jul 2024 10:20:49 -0400) 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:321169 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, dancol@dancol.org, > stefankangas@gmail.com > Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2024 10:20:49 -0400 > > >> By default, this minor mode does absolutely nothing. > > If it does absolutely nothing, then why did we enable it by default? > > It's only "enabled by default" in a trivial sense. > And that's inevitable since it's not even loaded. > > (boundp 'windmove-mode) returns nil in a fresh new Emacs session. That doesn't really answer my question. When I proposed to enable the windmove bindings as a side effect of turning on the mode, I was told that it was already turned on. If that is not true, how about going back to that proposal?