Re: Default setting for sh-maybe-here-document-mode

[Thibaut Verron <thibaut.verron@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2591 bytes --]

2015-02-20 18:08 GMT+01:00 Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>:

> >> Hmm... indeed, maybe it should be a global minor mode?
> > And auto-loaded?
>
> I think we could make it so that (setq sh-electric-here-document-mode
> nil) in your ~/.emacs would be sufficient.
>
> Autoloading it and having users put (sh-electric-here-document-mode -1)
> in their ~/.emacs means that those users end up loading
> sh-script.el eagerly.
>
> > This could work. Another option would be to reenable the binding on
> > '<' (see just below), and let users who do not want the behavior use
> > self-insert-command.
>
> No, using post-self-insert-hook instead of a key-binding was the main
> motivation behind the change.  Reverting this is not an option.
>

Now I am curious, I'll probably dive in the mailing list history to find
out more about this motivation.


>
> > It is very easy: try to feed a single line to a command, using a
> > here-string. In other words, try to enter
> >     command <<< "line of text"
>
> Ah, right, I remember this now (obviously, I never use it myself).
>
> Could you file a bug report for it?  I think the feature was developed
> at a time where <<< didn't exist, and accommodating <<< will require
> some rethinking.
>

Sure thing.


>
> > This use-case can be accommodated with this piece of code:
> > http://emacs.stackexchange.com/a/5338/184
> > It still fails in case the here-document is supposed to start with a <,
> > which is reasonable, but would probably be even more confusing as a
> default.
>
> It's also rather jarring to have a "big" chunk of text be inserted
> there, and it may not occur to the user than hitting a third < will get
> her what she wanted.
>
> > Another use-case, even if you never use here-strings, is that you want to
> > enter a single <, but enter << instead.  You would expect this mistake
> to be
> > corrected with a single backspace, but it's not.
>
> We could special case this, potentially, but at the same time `undo' is
> your friend.


I know, but for some reason I can't get the hang of using undo in the flow
of writing text.


>
> > By the way, we could design it so that the feature is still accessible,
> but
> > through more conventional entry points, for example by pressing TAB with
> > point after << .
>
> Right, or we could trigger the heredoc template after `< < SPC' rather
> than just after '< <'.  In any case, given the use of <<< I agree that
> the current moment at which heredoc is triggered is inappropriate.
>

This is a good idea, but in this case you also need to include < < - as a
trigger.

Thibaut

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3939 bytes --]