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: right-char and left-char Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 11:57:19 -0400 Message-ID: <878vowiylc.fsf@stupidchicken.com> References: <87k48it6g3.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <83pqiagew4.fsf@gnu.org> <87k48h224a.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <837h4hgg1y.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1318003053 25797 80.91.229.12 (7 Oct 2011 15:57:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 15:57:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 07 17:57:29 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RCCnf-0003hO-8Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2011 17:57:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59366 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RCCne-0006WF-Kp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2011 11:57:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:45835) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RCCnb-0006Vz-Hp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2011 11:57:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RCCna-0002fM-Gr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2011 11:57:23 -0400 Original-Received: from vm-emlprdomr-03.its.yale.edu ([130.132.50.144]:48526) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RCCnZ-0002ev-85; Fri, 07 Oct 2011 11:57:21 -0400 Original-Received: from furball (dhcp-128-36-59-9.central.yale.edu [128.36.59.9]) (authenticated bits=0) by vm-emlprdomr-03.its.yale.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p97FvJVE006585 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 7 Oct 2011 11:57:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: <837h4hgg1y.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 07 Oct 2011 14:08:25 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.71 on 130.132.50.144 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 130.132.50.144 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:144701 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Another question: how come C- is bound to `right-word' but >> M- is still bound to `forward-word'? An oversight? > > Not an oversight. Users of bidirectional scripts expect > Control-arrows to move by words in the paragraph direction, but they > don't expect Meta-arrows to do that. In fact, I'm not aware of many > applications that bind Meta-arrows to cursor motion commands. > > That said, I have no objections to make Meta-arrows do the same, if > you think being consistent is better. I don't think it will surprise > users of bidirectional scripts if we make Meta-arrows behave similarly > to Control-arrows. Yes, if we're going by the heuristic that "arrow keys obey bidi-paragraph-direction", it should be consistently applied. I'll make this change.