From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs undo behavior frustrating for new users. (WAS: delete-selection-mode as default) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 01:43:35 -0400 Message-ID: References: <0CCFABF4-0F2B-4DAA-9C8E-11E1254A325E@gmail.com> <87woqka4wg.fsf_-_@red-bean.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1539582102 11720 195.159.176.226 (15 Oct 2018 05:41:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 05:41:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: noeltaylo@gmail.com, right.ho@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 15 07:41:38 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gBvdJ-0002yf-EO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 07:41:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50478 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gBvfQ-0001s4-1A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 01:43:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34245) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gBvfJ-0001rm-Ik for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 01:43:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gBvfI-00067s-NC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 01:43:41 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:34673) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gBvfE-00064o-1l; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 01:43:37 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1gBvfD-0003Z0-Ss; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 01:43:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87woqka4wg.fsf_-_@red-bean.com> (message from Karl Fogel on Sun, 14 Oct 2018 11:07:11 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:230394 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] I had to hold my nose about the frequent use of sinular "they" in what your friend sent, but it is very interesting. I have nothing in principle against switching to an Undo/Redo system. But there is an obstacle: finding a key for the Redo command. However, I think this aspect of the behavior is bad: > > For example, in MS Word, if a user performs actions A, B, C, and D, > > and then undoes the last two actions, [perse] will be returned to a > > state in which only A and B have been performed. A good Undo/Redo system should save the states C and D somewhere and offer SOME way to get back to them. > > MS Word and other programs therefore define two kinds of actions: > > those that affect the contents of the text, ... and those that do not affect the > > contents of the text, leaving the action history unaffected. This might be feasible to implement as an option. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)