From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Tobias C. Rittweiler" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: please make line-move-visual nil Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 21:17:44 +0200 Message-ID: <87zlczptbb.fsf@freebits.de> References: <23521879.post@talk.nabble.com> <7b501d5c0905131659r1d79ec56s5a59f76e4713edf9@mail.gmail.com> <23532135.post@talk.nabble.com> <87tz3odq3l.fsf@iki.fi> <23538683.post@talk.nabble.com> <87eiuru24b.fsf@iki.fi> <39370.130.55.118.19.1242397867.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> <48914.130.55.118.19.1242592120.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> <66C6BA04EBCF4B6DAED69E851627D852@us.oracle.com> <54A5E41E3FD446F590AA580D90C5B518@us.oracle.com> <56DF3F5FED9445EAB0C666DE0904BAC2@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1243365497 25058 80.91.229.12 (26 May 2009 19:18:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 19:18:17 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 26 21:18:14 2009 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 1M92AA-00074Q-AP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 21:18:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56269 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M92A9-0003gz-Kr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 15:18:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M92A3-0003fE-HN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 15:18:07 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M929z-0003d1-Lv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 15:18:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33978 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M929z-0003co-IO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 15:18:03 -0400 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:48400 helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M929z-0003pR-57 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 15:18:03 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1M929v-0004s4-B3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 19:17:59 +0000 Original-Received: from host145.natpool.mwn.de ([138.246.7.145]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 19:17:59 +0000 Original-Received: from tcr by host145.natpool.mwn.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 19:17:59 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 26 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host145.natpool.mwn.de User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:+wpCm1fGw9NCyiiLts2IRQ2K28U= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/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:111122 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > Please give examples of modes where the choice is clear one way or the > other (sufficiently so that it should override the user's default > choice). We can then consider them. I still haven't seen any argument > for any particular mode, so I think it is fair to say that it is unclear > which modes should use which default. I've seen mention that text-mode > should use a value of t, but haven't understood why that would be > a better choice there than elsewhere. I think it's problematic in buffers that are supposed to be analyzed mechanically by external programs. A couple of weeks ago there was a scenario where I could easily have been bitten by the bug: I was working on some code which reports error locations as a file position + an offset in lines. When debugging that code, I first went to the file position in the source file, and then used `C-u NN C-n' to see if everything's working out correctly. When the buffer happened to contain wrapped lines, I'd have got to the wrong line, making me think that the error reporting code was at fault. It would probably have taken a while before I'd have found out what's actually faulty. -T.