I see no problem in it, sorry. And why was the user not aware of the
read-only status of the buffer to begin with?
How
plausible is such a
scenario?
Are
we trying to change Emacs behavior to cater to a clear
cockpit error?
> >against veteran Emacs behavior regarding read->only text,
> >behavior that is present in several other >commands, and that AFAIR
> >resulted from some past discussions.
>
> This is the only one that provided me this surprise in about a decade of Emacs use. Which other commands
> do the text manipulation, and then check the buffer read-only status?
C-w, to name just one.
IOW, a command could have useful side effects that are produced even
if the buffer is read-only and its text cannot be changed, thus
preventing the main effect of the command from happening.
> The flip question is: How common is a workflow, where a buffer is read-only, user does indentation, and is fine
> with seeing that error after the fact?
This goes both ways: if it's uncommon enough to be unimportant, then
changing the behavior is not important as well.
Kaushal Modi