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: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'. Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 10:20:17 -0600 Message-ID: <87pozfchq6.fsf@red-bean.com> References: <87vb98csu1.fsf@red-bean.com> <87h9kscqig.fsf@red-bean.com> <83vb98jqwp.fsf@gnu.org> <87k2poba1s.fsf@red-bean.com> <83si4cjnyw.fsf@gnu.org> <87twosp5ke.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87fv0cm64g.fsf@gmx.us> <87si4bsktk.fsf@red-bean.com> <87wptnlbl6.fsf@gmx.us> <87pozfl2ut.fsf@gmx.us> <87d1vfl17p.fsf@gmx.us> <878u63p6sh.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Reply-To: Karl Fogel NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447345251 13293 80.91.229.3 (12 Nov 2015 16:20:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 16:20:51 +0000 (UTC) To: Emacs developers Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 12 17:20:47 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zwuc7-00051N-3X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:20:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47642 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zwuc6-0007lj-Fo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:20:42 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51382) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zwubo-0007kc-1p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:20:25 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zwubk-0002wk-Ud for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:20:24 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ig0-x234.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c05::234]:36833) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zwubk-0002wa-Pk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:20:20 -0500 Original-Received: by igcph11 with SMTP id ph11so96891045igc.1 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 08:20:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:subject:references:reply-to:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=upJNE3r/UOg1Zh/F9eUg9dvjka+t/Zg3/mivDMVd15o=; b=r9HO8mcQTmyKtlAfa7KbPsl2Zfx8NlwZAPdMWU+T/Mu5DW4bDMXo4K6cLonivejs/+ 9ASeeNVIU4GnRq6p7J+KIGqGbyH3R8CFe2m1rMZ/YK1pMstA4EHxvor47U7bHqil6RZx t/zJTjJiCzCI4mSEpZKcJrerHx621uxnbOuyGpPD2UmhSx6/zw926Jkbg9URoigdTiUu FJ7Yjs0A9PRL59iyLIhQTjwrn5TSP1V7vj2ChTF3aVQsLu+4RsKu7hOMg8Z10gJq9S8M iGozx8M5j/uqEaXdD5EgajhzG5LLEuZMsm5FAZpU7iie0qc1kU0qRMuF8KxSp1jzyhyF YS7w== X-Received: by 10.50.88.8 with SMTP id bc8mr2871532igb.30.1447345220077; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 08:20:20 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from floss (74-92-190-114-Illinois.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [74.92.190.114]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id in9sm5174204igb.18.2015.11.12.08.20.17 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 12 Nov 2015 08:20:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <878u63p6sh.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (David Kastrup's message of "Thu, 12 Nov 2015 16:38:06 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4001:c05::234 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:194241 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: >Emacs will never be perfect in all respects, not least of all because >some indentations are motivated by aesthetic criteria and by judgment >calls on different criteria than Emacs uses. To intentionally make it >annoying to work around bad decisions in order to make developers change >Emacs is just stupid because the fallout will hit first and foremost the >users rather than the developers even if we hypothesize that for every >code there is exactly one correct and desirable and machine-determinable >way to indent it. As a statement of general principle, that's certainly reasonable. But in this situation, I don't think we face that particular tradeoff (and therefore Artur's proposed course of action makes the most sense). There is consensus that in column zero, C-o should do what it used to do (i.e., no electric indent). I think there's also consensus that in column >0, most of the time it makes sense for C-o to do electric indent even though there are sometimes cases where someone might want it to do no indentation. There has been one example of a mode where from column >0, the indentation itself is broken, so that after doing C-o one would have to go down to the mis-indented line to fix it -- but that would be just as true if there had been *no* indentation (IOW, with C-o from column >0, doing no indentation is not more or less broken than any other mis-indentation, and costs about the same for the user to fix afterwards). It's true that developers are more likely to fix that mode's indentation if the problem is less hidden from them, and in this case there isn't any compelling win for users if we mask the problem by making C-o completely indentation-insensitive, because for most users most of the time, "no indentation" would be just as broken a behavior as "indentation to the wrong place" (when doing C-o from column >0). Best regards, -Karl