From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Karl Fogel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A wish, a plea Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 23:27:51 -0700 Message-ID: <87k5twjyfs.fsf@red-bean.com> References: <4679F561.4030600@hacksaw.org> <87d4zomyiw.fsf@red-bean.com> <467AE609.20700@gnu.org> Reply-To: Karl Fogel NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1182461314 3996 80.91.229.12 (21 Jun 2007 21:28:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 21:28:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Hacksaw , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jason Rumney Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 21 23:28:32 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 1I1UCd-0005QZ-ND for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 23:28:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I1UCd-0005sD-6j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:28:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I1UC4-0005Uw-Eh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:27:56 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I1UC2-0005Tw-OO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:27:56 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I1UC2-0005Tn-Kl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:27:54 -0400 Original-Received: from sanpietro.red-bean.com ([66.146.193.61]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I1UC1-0007D1-Ke; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:27:53 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39484 ident=kfogel) by sanpietro.red-bean.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1I1UC0-0004mi-LA; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:27:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: <467AE609.20700@gnu.org> (Jason Rumney's message of "Thu\, 21 Jun 2007 21\:56\:41 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:73559 Archived-At: Jason Rumney writes: > Karl Fogel wrote: >> - It's true that "*scratch*" today opens with this message in it: >> >> ;; This buffer is for notes you don't want to save, and for >> ;; Lisp evaluation. If you want to create a file, visit that >> ;; file with C-x C-f, then enter the text in that file's own >> ;; buffer. >> >> But users don't read stuff, we all know that > > Sorry, but I just don't find that argument compelling. It clearly states > that the *scratch* buffer is NOT intended for the use that you and the > original poster are complaining it is not suited for. The fact that you > choose to wilfully ignore that message does not make it a bug. I agree that it is the user's fault. But so what? Why should that affect UI decisions? A Lisp Interaction buffer that doesn't even prompt to save on exit is a pointless default for the vast majority of Emacs's users. Putting that message in it doesn't make it any more useful, it just allows us to transfer blame. Furthermore, the failure mode of the status quo is much more severe than the failure mode of being asked to save scratch work that you don't want to save. In the first case you lose data; in the second, you may get annoyed with a question, but you don't lose any data. -Karl