Alan Mackenzie writes: >> > So we should have an electric-delete-trailing-whitespace-mode? > >> NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!!!! > > First of all, apologies for being so unecessarily emphatic, yesterday. To be honest, I've gotten used to you being very emphatic in most of your posts, so it didn't really phase me. > The connection between WS deletion and newline-and-indent/electric > indentation is that when n-a-i/e-i is in play, Emacs assumes that the > trailing WS on a line was put there by a previous use of n-a-i/e-i, > therefore it's the Right Thing to remove it. Otherwise (newline, no > electric indentation) the trailing WS stays. Yes, this sounds right to me. > I propose that newline be restored to its former functionality (i.e. > with no indentation of the new line) and be bound to C-j; that > newline-and-indent become the standard binding for ; that > indentation of a new line no longer be done by electric indentation, > since this is not needed; that the grossly misnamed, and now redundant > electric-indent-just-newline and the command of dubious utility > electric-newline-and-maybe-indent both be made obsolete. So like this: (I didn't do any obsoletion, since it doesn't affect testing)