From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juri Linkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:55:54 +0200 Organization: JURTA Message-ID: <877jnlb13a.fsf@jurta.org> References: <200412080256.30114.pogonyshev@gmx.net> <871xe1trnq.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <200412081740.48280.pogonyshev@gmx.net> <871xe0y8lg.fsf@jurta.org> <874qiwm8sq.fsf@jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1103022225 16760 80.91.229.6 (14 Dec 2004 11:03:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:03:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, pogonyshev@gmx.net Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 14 12:03:38 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CeASw-0002Xf-00 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:03:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CeAd4-0003Of-VC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 06:14:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CeAa1-0002ou-4Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 06:10:57 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CeAZw-0002mD-HR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 06:10:55 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CeAZv-0002ky-KW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 06:10:52 -0500 Original-Received: from [194.126.101.100] (helo=MXR-2.estpak.ee) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CeANz-0001Vj-N9; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 05:58:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.neti.ee (80-235-33-97-dsl.mus.estpak.ee [80.235.33.97]) by MXR-2.estpak.ee (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08026129164; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:58:26 +0200 (EET) Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:17:08 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at neti.ee 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: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:31106 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:31106 Stefan Monnier writes: >> It sounds like a good change. Stefan, are you convinced? > > Not really, but I don't think my opinion should have any special value here. > I'm after all not the typical user and I'm biased because I've gotten used > to the current behavior. If people like it, go for it. I might even end up > liking it as well, who knows. I noticed that in one half of situations I needed to start a new region with M-C-SPC, in another half to extend the active region. But while starting a new region is easy after C-g or C-SPC, extending the existing region was not possible at all. It is too inconvenient to start from scratch when the last command was not M-C-SPC, and to repeat a sequence of M-C-SPC to restore the previous region before continuing to extend it further. -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/