Re: line-line-move-visual: was line motion problem

[Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>]

David Reitter <david.reitter@gmail.com> writes:

> On 16 Jul 2008, at 12:26, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>
>> Yes, it should be a define-minor-mode (with name ending in "-mode").
>> Can someone make this change?
>
> What do we conclude from the discussion related to this?
>
> My understanding is that we were going to have visual navigation
> (arrow keys, C-n, C-p) default to on, and leave default behavior of C- 
> a and C-e as is, with some code (from the visual-line-mode that I
> posted) to optionally remap C-a and C-e to visual navigation as it is
> sensible in text modes.
>
> Should this be one minor mode that defaults to on, or should we have
> two minor modes then?
> Also, should C-a and C-e default to the visual mode in all text modes?
> (Would that just go in text-mode-hook?)

I think we should have a defcustom that sets the default value of
line-move-visual, and a minor mode (I guess it'll be called
visual-line-mode, since there doesn't seem to be any better name) that
provides the rest of the visual editing features.

The minor mode would then turn on word-wrap and line-move-visual in
buffers where it is activated.