From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: delete-selection-mode Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:24:21 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87ocitw2dl.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <201003130001.o2D01FFQ003489@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <87vdd1yqe4.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87eijjzrkd.fsf_-_@mail.jurta.org> <20100317143519.GB4381@muc.de> <22603146-A346-4FC2-8D74-5D6047865C3A@mit.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269051985 29966 80.91.229.12 (20 Mar 2010 02:26:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 02:26:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chad Brown Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 20 03:26:20 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 1NsoO4-0005kv-8N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 03:26:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53278 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NsoNz-00086h-6d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:25:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NsoNU-0007vC-0M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:25:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59103 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NsoNT-0007ug-A6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:25:27 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NsoNR-0001SB-QK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:25:26 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:52542) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NsoNA-0001Pp-3Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:25:25 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NsoMP-0008BX-VD; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:24:21 -0400 In-reply-to: <22603146-A346-4FC2-8D74-5D6047865C3A@mit.edu> (message from Chad Brown on Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:42:56 -0700) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.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:122328 Archived-At: * start an editor (emacs was the default editor, so it would be started in a great number of different contexts) * somehow generate text * sweep out an area with the mouse * type replacement text Thanks. That is what I would have guessed. So they care what happens when they type a self-inserting character after mouse-selection, but they don't care what happens when they type a self-inserting character after C-SPC selection or C-x C-x selection. However, note what Alan wrote. Maybe some of the users of those other programs think that Emacs is better. > I've just spoken to my sister, an "ordinary" computer user.  She says > she normally uses the key after marking text before typing > further.  She also gets annoyed "every now and then" when marked text > gets accidentally deleted by typing, though "it's not too bad" if > there's an undo key sequence. Yes, that is normal today since that is how it works during most of the editing people do today. Alan's point is that one ordinary user dislikes what most programs do today. She dislikes it in the other programs, and she would dislike it in Emacs too if we made Emacs do it.