From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general,gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.xemacs.beta
Subject: Re: Do we need gnus-yes-or-no-p and gnus-y-or-n-p?
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 12:16:05 -0500
Message-ID: <E1JBva1-000528-VY@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <v9642y8ahb.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
	<v9y7bxq8zn.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> <b4m63yygknt.fsf@jpl.org>
	<b4mprx3zjyi.fsf@jpl.org> <b4mve6ve7er.fsf@jpl.org>
	<v9odc0q9v9.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> <b4mzlvjolbi.fsf@jpl.org>
	<v9wsqni9vb.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> <b4my7b2w3f8.fsf@jpl.org> <b4mabniw3cs.fsf@jpl.org>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1199726236 17644 80.91.229.12 (7 Jan 2008 17:17:16 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 17:17:16 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, xemacs-beta@xemacs.org, ding@gnus.org
To: Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org>
Original-X-From: ding-owner+M14563@lists.math.uh.edu Mon Jan 07 18:17:38 2008
Return-path: <ding-owner+M14563@lists.math.uh.edu>
Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org
Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18])
	by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1JBvbV-0000vR-25
	for ding-account@gmane.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:17:37 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu)
	by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <ding-owner+M14563@lists.math.uh.edu>)
	id 1JBva8-0008UV-VE; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 11:16:13 -0600
Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33])
	by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <rms@gnu.org>)
	id 1JBva7-0008UJ-L2
	for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 11:16:11 -0600
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51])
	by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.67)
	(envelope-from <rms@gnu.org>)
	id 1JBva6-0004AB-H0
	for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 11:16:11 -0600
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1JBva6-0005Gg-00
	for <ding@gnus.org>; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:16:10 +0100
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <rms@gnu.org>)
	id 1JBva1-000528-VY; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 12:16:06 -0500
In-reply-to: <b4mabniw3cs.fsf@jpl.org> (message from Katsumi Yamaoka on Mon,
	07 Jan 2008 15:34:43 +0900)
X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--)
List-ID: <ding.gnus.org>
Precedence: bulk
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:66070 gmane.emacs.devel:86499 gmane.emacs.xemacs.beta:26704
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/86499>

    The behavior of `y-or-n-p' that it doesn't clear the question
    and the answer is not serious of course, but I feel it is not
    cool.

It is intentional.

    Currently, it is commented out in the trunk by Reiner Steib.  He
    also wrote the benefit of leaving the question and the answer in
    the echo area as follows:

    (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/66061)
    > In contrast to yes-or-no-p it is much easier to type y, n,
    > SPC, DEL, etc accidentally, so it might be useful for the user
    > to see what he has typed.

Yes, that is the reason.