From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tassilo Horn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: line-move-visual Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 00:02:12 +0200 Organization: University Koblenz-Landau Campus Koblenz Message-ID: <87r5ke4kd7.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> References: <87pr07qjio.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> <878w6vq7ew.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> <871vcmhq79.fsf@wivenhoe.ul.ie> <580d5f23-e251-483f-9752-7e77b1ca2fb7@40g2000pry.googlegroups.com> <2a7dc148-e2cc-4681-9d8c-ccd1140aa6d7@j36g2000prj.googlegroups.com> <089883ee-0a63-4cb4-a0ec-d2fe4e71cc03@y18g2000prn.googlegroups.com> <87wruco5yq.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87wrubfd8p.fsf@rapttech.com.au> <848w6ndwn0.fsf@cs.bham.ac.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1291831485 9976 80.91.229.12 (8 Dec 2010 18:04:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 18:04:45 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 08 19:04:41 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PQONY-0005lo-Hm for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 19:04:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51021 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PQONX-0005Wa-Cs for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 13:04:35 -0500 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!news-2.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-kl.de!cache.uni-koblenz.de!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help,comp.emacs,comp.lang.lisp Original-Lines: 21 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: p54af1a04.dip0.t-ipconnect.de Original-X-Trace: cache.uni-koblenz.de 1276207334 29312 84.175.26.4 (10 Jun 2010 22:02:14 GMT) Original-X-Complaints-To: news@cache.uni-koblenz.de Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:02:14 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:a3Uh0uJaMS0d+93EndHZGIXjxWA= Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:178815 comp.emacs:99983 comp.lang.lisp:288919 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:75757 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > - when no line wraps, it either makes no difference, or it works > slightly better because it correctly accounts for > variable-pitch fonts. > - when lines are long [...], the new behavior is much better (how did > you move to "that spot I see about 10 visual-lines down from point" in > a single logical line in previous Emacsen?). I agree, and with the macro exception I'm in favour of operating on visual lines by default. But what I don't understand is why there are two levels of operating on visual lines: line-move-visual and visual-line-mode. IMO, the former is confusing, because C-a/e (and probably others) still operate on logical lines. I guess, that's because VLM is more invasive, i.e. keys get bound to new functions. But then, why not drop VLM altogether and make `move-beginning/end-of-line' obey line-move-visual, too? Bye, Tassilo