From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: arrow keys vs. C-f/b/n/p Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 20:58:18 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87d3w2ncqs.fsf_-_@lola.goethe.zz> <87iq5py7xk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <83fx0slhxn.fsf@gnu.org> <83pqzwjkn9.fsf@gnu.org> <83mxv0je2b.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1276369522 24259 80.91.229.12 (12 Jun 2010 19:05:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 19:05:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 12 21:05:20 2010 connect(): No such file or directory 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 1ONW19-0004Cf-4H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 21:05:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58000 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ONW18-0001mq-L6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:05:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=40293 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ONVun-0002xm-Uc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:58:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ONVuh-0008OQ-5e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:58:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.213.169]:62279) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ONVuh-0008OJ-39; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:58:39 -0400 Original-Received: by yxf34 with SMTP id 34so195403yxf.0 for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:58:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=z1Oyz2KFI2xid9ltmg3mLLE/ff5Mx4WOYivNAYHsYik=; b=aBOCIxwFWLLVVUeIeg5rjtCo2GPgIKcV5Gqd94S4aoJVQmFP6ST+fMgmbKNBmh12/b d+0yRBJiro5cKWXk59X2r9tQnjXCxVCciQFszBC2KFjb9pm/o2qMhl+DdYwdzYYirOPT IHb836uGs2HN+HgAuIbu17RxFmJUyvWricFIM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=xtyYKDZQgYCWpSbNPt12BGAYScGWq6sTU+efHW9kayN0tq8irmu06ye08a+Tco5Ghh yEAn/i0Sx3yKAxQtMay3u5uNbtttQAH6RCyGRI2G75BjUpVmET9oh2zYb+/o+fhKEUu5 0GIEOtjUvMczTGPo+2ewUPgVS4QHE7sk0b+Pc= Original-Received: by 10.100.245.40 with SMTP id s40mr2997525anh.137.1276369118221; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:58:38 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.100.154.15 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:58:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83mxv0je2b.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:125836 Archived-At: On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Lennart Borgman >> Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 18:18:18 +0200 >> Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, dak@gnu.org, cloos@jhcloos.com, emacs-devel@g= nu.org >> >> I think the default should be that cursor keys (and keys like page >> up/down) should move visually. > > You are talking as a typical L2R user, as in that case visual and > logical order are identical. I do not think visual motion actually has anything to do with that. > For users of R2L scripts, what you suggest is a disaster. =C2=A0If cursor > motion is visual by default, one cannot even mark text by holding > Shift and moving point with the arrow keys. I see no reason for this. The arrow keys will with visual motion move just as they do if all the text where just L2R. So the visual part will work as before (on the user side, implementation may have to change). Converting the visual region you visually see on the screen to a logical range is a bit difficult, but not impossible. The difficulty is of course to decide what the range on the screen will be if the end points of the visual region happen to disagree about the direction. (If there are more difficulties then I am unaware of them at the moment.) The answer to this is as far as I can see that the visual region in this case no longer internally corresponds to a single range, but to two noncontinuous ranges in the buffer. If I am correct on this, is not this then a difficulty that must be handled to finish the bidi support? > And that's just the tip > of the iceberg. =C2=A0Without logical-order motion keys, Emacs (and every > other editor of similar sophistication) is much less useful. I think you are referring to the difficulty I suggested above. If not, what more problems do you see?