From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Differences between ibuffer and dired Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 09:47:30 -0700 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278002974 20038 80.91.229.12 (1 Jul 2010 16:49:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 16:49:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: joakim@verona.se, 'Emacs-Devel devel' To: "'Lennart Borgman'" , "'Deniz Dogan'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 01 18:49:32 2010 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 1OUMx8-00021m-PI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 18:49:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34507 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OUMwx-0006z0-6s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 12:49:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50878 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OUMvR-0005jJ-6d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 12:47:50 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUMvM-000592-1R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 12:47:45 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]:36566) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUMvL-00058J-SY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 12:47:40 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o61GlYqA011696 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 1 Jul 2010 16:47:35 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt355.oracle.com (acsmt355.oracle.com [141.146.40.155]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o618dEkr007481; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 16:47:32 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt018.oracle.com by acsmt353.oracle.com with ESMTP id 389107211278002850; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 09:47:30 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/130.35.178.194) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 09:47:30 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcsZMwIh4zJJRuR2QuSm88/kNKQhiQABJksg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5931 X-Source-IP: acsmt355.oracle.com [141.146.40.155] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090208.4C2CC6A5.0265:SCFMA4539814,ss=1,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:126639 Archived-At: > > I would like that very much. I'm just afraid that both modes are so > > old that people have gotten very used to the keymaps by now and will > > be very reluctant to relearn them if we change them now. > > Just prepare to make it an option if old users complain. I would guess > that very many are annoyed by the difference today. If you really must do this kind of thing, please keep it to a minimum. And please propose and discuss each key change on its own merits. And remember that Dired is _much_ older - Ibuffer is only a few years old (~2007, IIUC). Attempts to move toward consistency here should, other things being equal, move toward the Dired bindings, not those of Ibuffer. To the extent that consistency here is important, Ibuffer should have dealt with it at the time it was created. And maybe it did: Perhaps the designers of Ibuffer had good reasons for any inconsistencies they introduced between Ibuffer and Dired. (That does not necessarily mean they were right.) To the extent that any such inconsistencies were simply oversights, they can be considered Ibuffer bugs. Keep in mind too that it is not simply the habits of users that will be affected. 3rd-party libraries are likely to have adopted the bindings of one or the other of these libraries, for consistency with it (and hence with user habits). For example, Bookmark+ is consistent with Dired's bindings (e.g. wrt marking and removing marks and flags). Dired has been present since Day One; it has many, many users; and it has likely influenced a good deal of non-core code by now. Do not gratuitously change its bindings. Finally, remember that there can be good reasons for inconsistency between different parts of a system. In particular, it can be the case that consistency (or optimization or convenience or some other quality) _within_ a part calls for inconsistency _between_ parts. For example, the key bindings within Ibuffer need to work together and fit the logic and use of Ibuffer features, and that consideration could argue in favor of differences with Dired. (Just hypothetical - I know little about Ibuffer itself.) In sum: * Treat proposed changes on a case-by-case basis, discussing them. * Respect Dired. Respect time. Respect user numbers. * Consider consistency wrt its scope. And remember that it is not the only important quality.