From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: C-d deleting region considered harmful Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:29:04 +0900 Message-ID: <87sk13wqxb.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <87eicrx1ls.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <4C94E03D.8090002@gmail.com> <87fwx699pc.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <83tylmyclx.fsf@gnu.org> <4C961787.3090907@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1285051000 22928 80.91.229.12 (21 Sep 2010 06:36:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 06:36:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Christoph Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 21 08:36:38 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OxwT0-00007m-A1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 08:36:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37619 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OxwSz-00016I-FT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 02:36:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=40561 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OxwSq-000166-JS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 02:36:29 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OxwSp-0002jE-FQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 02:36:28 -0400 Original-Received: from imss11.cc.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.254.160]:40156) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OxwSn-0002iQ-49; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 02:36:25 -0400 Original-Received: from imss11.cc.tsukuba.ac.jp (imss11.cc.tsukuba.ac.jp [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss71 (Postfix) with ESMTP id E18F119F983; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:36:21 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mgmt1.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (unknown [130.158.97.223]) by imss11.cc.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id D394619F982; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:36:21 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt1.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1A353FA04A4; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:36:21 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9C1191A3ABA; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:29:04 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <4C961787.3090907@gmail.com> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" ed3b274cc037 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:130560 Archived-At: Christoph writes: > On 9/18/2010 3:18 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > >> So I just switched off `transient-mark-mode', which is something > >> I suspect most Emacs old-timers will be more comfortable with. > > > > Here's one such old-timer. > Out of curiosity, from old-timer to new-timer, what advantages does > the traditional Emacs behavior over transient-mark-mode? Mostly, it's traditional and old-timers are used to it. It took me close to a month to get used to the various differences, then I decided I liked t-m-m (actually, zmacs-regions) better on than off. More scientifically, if you have an active region, then you can have "modal" behavior: deletion operations can (implicitly) act on the region instead of on specific text units, insertion operations can (implicitly) substitute new text for the region, and so on. Without active regions, you can't have this kind of modal behavior. The two styles are *equally* powerful. Some people like the modal, DWIMmish, behavior better (it can be slightly more efficient in terms of keystroke count), while others like the non-modal, DWIS ("do what I say"), behavior better (it's better adapted to creating personal idioms and using "muscle memory", I think). Much of the taste difference can be attributed to "what you are used to", of course, and I think that the strongest reasons for preferring one to the other are what you are used to as "traditional" for you.