From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Brockman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: bind next-error and previous-error in Occur mode? read-only? Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 03:53:21 +0100 Message-ID: <87veimio66.fsf@wigwam.brockman.se> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1170298914 20172 80.91.229.12 (1 Feb 2007 03:01:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 03:01:54 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 01 04:01:38 2007 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 1HCSCe-0005aE-V7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:01:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HCSCe-0001PH-BW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:01:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HCSCS-0001NU-TO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:01:24 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HCSCS-0001NC-6e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:01:24 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HCSCS-0001N9-3D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:01:24 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1HCSCR-0001Vo-EK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:01:23 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HCSCK-0002ga-S8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:01:16 +0100 Original-Received: from c-a4fee255.09-32-6c6b7013.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se ([85.226.254.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:01:16 +0100 Original-Received: from daniel by c-a4fee255.09-32-6c6b7013.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:01:16 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 24 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-a4fee255.09-32-6c6b7013.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se X-Face: :&2UWGm>e24)ip~'K@iOsA&JT3JX*v@1-#L)=dUb825\Fwg#`^N!Y*g-TqdS AevzjFJe96f@V'ya8${57/T'"mTd`1o{TGYhHnVucLq!D$r2O{IN)7>.0op_Y`%r;/Q +(]`3F-t10N7NF\.Mm0q}p1:%iqTi:5]1E]rDF)R$9.!,Eu'9K':y9^U3F8UCS1M+A$ 8[[[WT^`$P[vu>P+8]aQMh9giu&fPCqLW2FSsGs User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.51 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:eAtagCIfw2JoZIzP+jfxHmIRBp4= X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:65733 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: > I also just noticed `occur-next', bound to `M-n' in *Occur*. > It's good to have a binding that does this, but wouldn't `C-n' > be more logical? IOW, wouldn't it make sense to have `C-n' > be `occur-next' and have `next-error-follow-minor-mode' > use `M-n' instead of `C-n'? Is there a reason to keep `C-n' > as `next-line'? Yes. In fact, there is a very good reason: That binding is standard throughout all of Emacs. I always use `C-n' to move to the next line, and I would be confused if that binding was changed in the *Occur* buffer --- even though the command `occur-next' is similar to `next-line'. Why do you think `C-n' is more logical than `M-n' here? To me, it makes sense to rebind `C-n' only when moving by lines in the usual manner does not itself make any sense. After all, `next-line' is a pretty useful command. -- Daniel Brockman