From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: C-x C-b and C-x C-f bugging about confirmation Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:46:23 -0500 Message-ID: <87vduhm69c.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> References: <1227274391.618443.2559.nullmailer@null> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1227282390 14639 80.91.229.12 (21 Nov 2008 15:46:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:46:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ams@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 21 16:47:31 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 1L3YEC-00082K-NC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:47:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54139 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L3YD3-0007rF-Rz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:46:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L3YCz-0007qf-Fm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:46:13 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L3YCw-0007qJ-BJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:46:13 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35930 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L3YCw-0007qG-3w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:46:10 -0500 Original-Received: from cyd.mit.edu ([18.115.2.24]:42470) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L3YCs-0007TX-SZ; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:46:06 -0500 Original-Received: by cyd.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E764857E09E; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:46:23 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:35:48 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:105893 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: >> why on earth does C-x C-b and C-x C-f ask me to confirm when I wish to >> open a new buffer/file? > > So as to help prevent doing it by mistake when you mistyped. > Set confirm-nonexistent-file-or-buffer to nil to get back the old > behavior (or just hit RET twice, of course). I see, I didn't realize you intended to make it the default. I don't think it's a good default. With minibuffer completion, typing mistakes don't happen all that often, and it can be disconcerting to have a RET rejected. You might argue that it's no big deal to type a second RET, but it's similarly no big deal to kill the buffer and try again in the very few occasions that you make a mistake. So this looks like creeping featuritis if it's enabled by default. Furthermore, nothing else in the core Emacs code, AFAICT, uses a "[Confirm]" message of this sort where you have to type RET twice to do what you want. In cases like this, we usually use y-or-n prompts instead. Thus, even if there is a good reason in this case to prompt the user in this unusual way, it leaves the user confused about what to do (especially since the "[Confirm]" message is so cryptic).