From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bastien Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: recenter-top-bottom Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:15:27 +0000 Message-ID: <87hcjr1u6o.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1194869741 7489 80.91.229.12 (12 Nov 2007 12:15:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:15:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 12 13:15:46 2007 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 1IrYCf-0000gj-PR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:15:46 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IrYCT-0003vg-Jn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:15:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IrYCP-0003sz-TM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:15:29 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IrYCN-0003oZ-79 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:15:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IrYCN-0003oO-1N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:15:27 -0500 Original-Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.185]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IrYCM-0006s9-NZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:15:26 -0500 Original-Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so1107703nfh for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 04:15:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:sender; bh=Mva5lFfW/+mOwuaAJN9TpViNP0RY+NP/uO/G72FfDiQ=; b=PNJ7jKDFGodvbci+HV0o1KiVushX+Sq9gDoPeZVkkH58LtjoYFKuKtJlvXw7LWEA6Hj489S0xUo1geAQgzzob3B6kK7cJ8QcN943gg/PGuJpGpr/Bqmy/oFU4r9bMjZi6o1dG171qHyyPbICm23eDcNuH935r0ss9SJWYMp1cEI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:sender; b=JInm6moZrGkjcNzDeaa2LK/ZtQBY7BoV9WZw4lQiOVP5wuceRSbSKPmhUtPBP8x6Bv2kBLK7ZsuWugP5IlUBs98QRIvQOKyP5TqNIF3U2bEkBktO/wYo5E/BiTC4mH5eEFCklrGTKq6/IorS4KsabN1AmTMuPfifH6NgtVld8Gs= Original-Received: by 10.78.151.3 with SMTP id y3mr5223769hud.1194869725369; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 04:15:25 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from bzg.ath.cx ( [81.99.213.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d27sm6348573nfh.2007.11.12.04.15.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 04:15:24 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by bzg.ath.cx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 099C01575BA; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:15:26 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:50:45 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/23.0.0 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:83048 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: >> So I think your first suggestion is better, and I am still thinking >> of maybe installing it. If people are very enthusiastic about >> your second suggestion, I will say yes to it. > > Just to make it easier for people who might want to try both and compare, > here again are the two definitions. Each is a possible alternative binding > for `C-l'. (I've added the `scroll-conservatively' feature to #1, as well as > #2.) Thanks for summing up. Another problem with #2 is this: if the window height is 60 and the point is at 19, people might not be *sure* that the point is in the first third of the window. Pressing C-l will then put the point at the bottom, while there were expecting it to jump on the top. Note that in this case, C-l will do the exact *opposite* of what they want, which is not only surprising, but rather disappointing! Relying on the fact that user is able to spot the position of the point very precisely is not a good thing, especially for large windows, and especially when the point is between two thirds, where it is the more difficult to evaluate the position visually. In fact, I often use C-l to spare me the cost of being sure where the point is. -- Bastien