From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help
Subject: Re: Proper behavior of C-u 3 C-v
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2020 12:30:08 +0200
Message-ID: <877dty993j.fsf@ebih.ebihd>
References: <8450b9205b4c686979c2e26962d377a7@posteo.net>
 <837dtzkh3k.fsf@gnu.org> <87h7t3xm2u.fsf@gnu.org>
Reply-To: Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214";
	logging-data="2936"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)
To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:BsaMrMDdaBvWNiIzQ2MoTNC5gxk=
Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 16 12:30:51 2020
Return-path: <help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@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 <help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1k7FwB-0000gF-15
	for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 12:30:51 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57914 helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
	(envelope-from <help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1k7FwA-0001zC-3M
	for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 06:30:50 -0400
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41976)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org>)
 id 1k7Fvf-0001yT-F4
 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 06:30:19 -0400
Original-Received: from static.214.254.202.116.clients.your-server.de
 ([116.202.254.214]:42204 helo=ciao.gmane.io)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org>)
 id 1k7Fvd-0005bs-Pb
 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 06:30:19 -0400
Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92)
 (envelope-from <geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org>)
 id 1k7Fva-00006E-Ki
 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 12:30:14 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Mail-Copies-To: never
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214;
 envelope-from=geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/08/16 06:30:15
X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS   = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy]
X-Spam_score_int: -8
X-Spam_score: -0.9
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: (-0.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=1,
 SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
 URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor <help-gnu-emacs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/help-gnu-emacs>,
 <mailto:help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-gnu-emacs>
List-Post: <mailto:help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs>,
 <mailto:help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs"
 <help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:123671
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help/123671>

Amin Bandali wrote:

> The doc string is indeed clear, but I personally
> wouldn't have expected that behaviour. I'm curious
> if there's a particular reason why C-v deviates
> from the convention of other similar movement
> commands, where specifying a numerical ARG `n'
> would have the effect of performing that command's
> action `n' times (e.g. M-3 M-f to move forward
> three words).

Another inconsistency is

  (scroll-down 1)
  (scroll-up   1)

where one expects the byte-compiler to say, use
(scroll 1) and (scroll -1) instead, but it doesn't,
and for good reason because there isn't
a `scroll', even.

And another inconsistency is:

  (scroll-other-window-down 1)
  (scroll-other-window      1)

compared to scroll-up/scroll-down, where -up
is explicit.

But actually, I think that looks better and what
I see nothing stops you from using
(scroll-other-window -X) instead of
(scroll-other-window-down X). It is also more clear
since people have different ideas what up and down,
but just "scroll" everyone can agree means "read on".

BTW civilized scrolling, one step at a time,
including horizontally:

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/emacs-init/scroll.el

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
https://dataswamp.org/~incal