From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Documentation of transient-mark-mode is sloppy, wrong, and confused. Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 20:21:44 -0400 Message-ID: <874ov4ahd3.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> References: <20090528122927.GA2175@muc.de> <87fxepf9s8.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> <20090528201529.GA4605@muc.de> <87bppdx8c0.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> <20090528230359.GA1474@muc.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1243556495 9030 80.91.229.12 (29 May 2009 00:21:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 00:21:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 29 02:21:32 2009 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 1M9pqm-0007Ow-Ge for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 May 2009 02:21:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39949 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M9pql-0003WU-Jw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 20:21:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M9pqg-0003W0-3m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 20:21:26 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M9pqb-0003Pk-HG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 20:21:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35558 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M9pqb-0003Pc-Aa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 20:21:21 -0400 Original-Received: from cyd.mit.edu ([18.115.2.24]:59287) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M9pqa-0003bo-VJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 20:21:21 -0400 Original-Received: by cyd.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1892B57E21E; Thu, 28 May 2009 20:21:44 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20090528230359.GA1474@muc.de> (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Thu, 28 May 2009 23:03:59 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.91 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:111168 Archived-At: Alan Mackenzie writes: >> As for changing the "active mark" terminology, that's not particularly >> profitable, because it's already deeply embedded in the C and Lisp code >> for over a decade. > > Bugs should be fixed, regardless of how long they've been in the source. > What's new here is that the current bug is no longer a mere option, it's > become a factory default. No, changing the variable `mark-active' is a non-starter. There's too much code outside the Emacs source tree that depends on its current meaning.