From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Concern about new binding. Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2021 00:39:49 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo.ref@Ergus> <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo@Ergus> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40843"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 04 06:42:12 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1l7XP9-000AVP-UA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 06:42:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59442 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7XP9-0006qE-1E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 00:42:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55936) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7XN1-0004xX-Ip for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 00:40:01 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:58982) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7XN1-0002ev-AF; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 00:39:59 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1l7XMr-00040g-2I; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 00:39:49 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Gregory Heytings on Wed, 03 Feb 2021 09:37:07 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:263844 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 see another disadvantage in that binding: revert-buffer is a drastic > > operation, so we should not make it easier. I think it is wiser not to > > put it on a key -- which is why I never did. > > > It's true that it is a drastic operation, but it asks for confirmation, > and it can be undone. An additional security measure would be to disable > it by default: (put 'revert-buffer 'disabled t). Typing 8 characters to invoke the command is not a big burden. I think it is a reasonable length for a command like this. How many times per day do you do revert-buffer in a file-visiting buffer? -- Dr Richard Stallman Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)