From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `C-b' is backward-char, `left' is left-char - why? Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 20:26:01 +0200 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <87pqms16fa.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <6F4054004B154CFB8E2753172D316C13@us.oracle.com> <4DE4F8D0.7010800@lanl.gov> <82y61l16bg.fsf@gmail.com> <87vcwo40tn.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <834o48f6sa.fsf@gnu.org> <8762on3rvj.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83lixjdkae.fsf@gnu.org> <201106051651.p55GpANm013542@beta.mvs.co.il> <83oc2ccign.fsf@gnu.org> <201106051719.p55HJDMZ023870@beta.mvs.co.il> <87y61g195p.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83mxhwcgvn.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1307298401 8263 80.91.229.12 (5 Jun 2011 18:26:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 18:26:41 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jun 05 20:26:37 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 1QTI20-0004Wu-VS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 20:26:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33520 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QTI1z-0005QL-HG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 14:26:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:37745) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QTI1h-0005Q2-MU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 14:26:18 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QTI1g-00019R-Ka for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 14:26:17 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:58467) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QTI1g-00017R-8l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 14:26:16 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QTI1e-0004NC-JO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 20:26:14 +0200 Original-Received: from p508ead37.dip.t-dialin.net ([80.142.173.55]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 20:26:14 +0200 Original-Received: from dak by p508ead37.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 20:26:14 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 48 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p508ead37.dip.t-dialin.net X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:HmbZkTecsRtt/JyIzIZ2GTPVDXU= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 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:140208 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: David Kastrup >> Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 19:26:58 +0200 >> >> However, there is no reason that straight visual movement when using >> shift-selection would interfere with selection as such: you just can't >> expect that the marked region is visually contiguous. The size of the >> selection will jump when crossing visually from L2R and R2L. >> >> But I see no logical problem with that. > > The problems with this are not logical, they are with implementing it > (both the movement itself and the resulting selection and highlight). > Patches are welcome. The resulting selection and highlight appear to do just what is needed already and don't seem to have a problem with visual discontinuity. So only the movement itself would appear to be an issue. If one has text like llllllllRRRRRRRRllllll there is a difference between the cursor being just to the right of the first lll passage (namely before all of the RRR), and being just to the left of the RRR passage (namely after all of the RRR). Since being just to the left of the RRR passage is the same point position as being just to the left of the second lll passage, the effect of shift-marking while moving left (let's reserve uppercase now for the marked passage) would flip: llllllllrrrrRrrrllllll llllllllrrrRRrrrllllll llllllllrrRRRrrrllllll llllllllrRRRRrrrllllll llllllllRRRRRrrrllllll lllllllLrrrrrRRRllllll Actually, I've just tried entering mixed L2R and R2L stuff with the keyboard and bidi-display-reordering set, and I find it quite distracting that the insertion point for "reversed" text (with regard to the current paragraph direction) gets increasingly distant from the cursor itself. -- David Kastrup