From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Shift selection using interactive spec Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:40:37 +0100 Message-ID: <87r6e8fefe.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> References: <87k5k69p92.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <200803140408.m2E47hPU014494@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <87prtxpekk.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87abl11ilo.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <874pb9koyw.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87od9gzqv9.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87bq5gytbi.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <8763vndi0r.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87hcf6ratt.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <878x0if9ul.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87od9e9gnx.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <873aqp5mzs.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87lk4h3vm5.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205840467 17367 80.91.229.12 (18 Mar 2008 11:41:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:41:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Dan Nicolaescu , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 18 12:41:34 2008 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 1JbaCD-0000pI-Nx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:41:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JbaBd-0001U7-V6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:40:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JbaBZ-0001Sy-3U for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:40:53 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JbaBY-0001SW-1Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:40:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JbaBX-0001SQ-Rq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:40:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-relay.sonofon.dk ([212.88.64.25]) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JbaBX-0006E8-9e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:40:51 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 98678 invoked from network); 18 Mar 2008 11:40:38 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO kfs-lx.rd.rdm.cua.dk) (213.83.150.21) by 0 with SMTP; 18 Mar 2008 11:40:38 -0000 In-Reply-To: <87lk4h3vm5.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Mon\, 17 Mar 2008 17\:10\:10 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.92 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: FreeBSD 4.6-4.9 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:92885 Archived-At: Chong Yidong writes: > Stefan Monnier writes: > >>> Nevertheless, regardless of the exact details, shift-selection will >>> have to end up setting transient-mark-mode to a non-nil value. >> >> Indeed. I just saw that Miles and Kim were talking about moving the >> handling of "only" to deactivate-mark, or something along those lines. >> >> I plead guilty to turning transient-mark-mode into a non-boolean >> variable, and would be happy to see it go back to being boolean. > > If we're willing to ignore backward compatibility, The t-m-m 'only stuff was added in Emacs 23.x, so it's ok to undo that particular change and replace it by something else. More radical changes that would break code which works with 22.x is IMO not an option. So IMO the proposal below is simply too radical a change re. backwards compatibility. > I think a good way > to clean this up as follows: > > - make transient-mark-mode a boolean again It's wasn't a boolean in 22.x either (it may be 'lambda too). > - give mark-active a couple new possible values: This is simply non-manageable, breaking way too much code. I don't understand why there's such a big fuzz over this. Based on my experience with CUA mode, and Miles' ideas, it seems sufficient to use t-m-m "only" mode for the case where t-m-m is off (the default), and simply leaving t-m-m on for the case where t-m-m is on (set by user) should do what we want. This makes it a question of finding the right condition for keeping or deactivating the mark at the end of a given command... which is the question in all cases anyway. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk