From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Richard M. Stallman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Visual cleanup for customize buffers Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:44:57 -0500 Message-ID: References: <200601122345.k0CNjx114407@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200601131418.k0DEIld23354@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200601150140.k0F1eaD23641@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200601160419.k0G4JGv09689@raven.dms.auburn.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1137702465 3863 80.91.229.2 (19 Jan 2006 20:27:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:27:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, storm@cua.dk Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 19 21:27:43 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EzgNF-0001c0-QV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:27:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EzgPh-0002nY-8e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:29:45 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ezdvk-0006GW-0K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:50:40 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ezdvj-0006G0-62 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:50:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ezdvi-0006Fp-Ny for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:50:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Ezdzn-0002A2-61 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:54:51 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1EzdqD-0008LQ-Tn; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:44:58 -0500 Original-To: Luc Teirlinck In-reply-to: <200601160419.k0G4JGv09689@raven.dms.auburn.edu> (message from Luc Teirlinck on Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:19:17 -0600 (CST)) 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:49266 Archived-At: I suggest a different solution: don't allow hiding a setting that is in state "SET". That would be bad, because unlike EDITED items, SET items can _start out_ hidden when the group is first visited. We could change that too, if it makes things clearer. But after quite a while, he searches for another item, which, by coincidence, turns out to be in the same group as one or more of the items he has set outside any Custom buffer. The group is huge, so he does not see this. He saves the one item he wants to save and inadvertently also saves the items he only wanted to set temporarily. That is a good point, and it suggests that these multi-setting commands ought to display a list of the settings they are really going to operate on, when they ask for confirmation. Then it would not be cause special problem if SET settings are hidden.