From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tim X Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: an inconvenient difference in Emacs 22 Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 15:42:03 +1000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <87y7eyos44.fsf@lion.rapttech.com.au> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1190529642 15219 80.91.229.12 (23 Sep 2007 06:40:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 06:40:42 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 23 08:40:38 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IZL8v-00046c-3P for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 08:40:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZL8s-0004de-Lw for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 02:40:34 -0400 Original-Path: shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!news3.google.com!sn-xt-sjc-05!sn-xt-sjc-06!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:aWYQ+pGT9aGGq8v/OFsDqzir5y0= Original-X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Original-Lines: 64 Original-Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:152241 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:47750 Archived-At: Steve Newcomb writes: > "Drew Adams" writes: > >> > "Steve Newcomb" wrote: >> > >> > In older versions of Emacs, C-X C-F ENTER has always re-read the >> > file associated with the buffer the user was already in. >> > >> > In my shiny new Emacs 22, this doesn't happen. Instead, >> > what is opened is the directory >> >> I believe that this was done deliberately. >> >> FWIW, you can do `C-x C-f C-n' to get what you want (at the cost of another >> keystroke). The `C-n' retrieves the default value, which is the name of the >> current file. > > FYI: That didn't work. > > From: "Denis Bueno" >> I believe you can also do `C-c C-v RET'. > > FYI: That didn't work either. > > I suspect these things didn't work because of my own .emacs, which > is old and woolly. > >> If you often revert a buffer (e.g. re-read a file), you might consider >> binding `revert-buffer' to a quick key sequence - I use `S-f1', for >> instance. > > Good idea. That worked! > > Thanks for these suggestions. > > In the end, an even better approach, at least for our purposes, may be > global-auto-revert-mode. I am chagrined to discover that this mode > has been around for a while, and I just didn't know it. Until I read > your suggestions, I had never understood that, in the jargon of Emacs, > "revert-buffer", means "update the buffer". > > I'm curious about this usage of the word "revert". "Revert" normally > connotes some sort of retrograde motion. As far as I know, it never > connotes forward motion at all, much less forward motion undertaken to > catch up with someone else's forward motion. But, until I'm > corrected, that's how I'll understand "revert" in the context of Emacs. > > -- Steve I think the 'revert' terminology is used because what you are doing is reverting the buffer back to what is on disk. So really, it is a backwards move - its only that you are actively updating the file on disk that it has the appearance of being a forward move. In other situations, you may decide that the changes you have made in the buffer were all wrong and you want to revert it back to what was in the original disk file. I can't think of another term that would cover both the situations of reverting back to the contents in a static file and updating to reflect updates in the original file (given they both involve essentially the same mechanism). Tim -- tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au