From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tino Calancha Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dired: Improve symmetry in mark/unmark commands bound to keys Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 01:30:35 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: References: <877fa12iyq.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <83h995ay04.fsf@gnu.org> <87y42h13pi.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <83fuopax4g.fsf@gnu.org> <87twd512pk.fsf@linux-m68k.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1474907576 14355 195.159.176.226 (26 Sep 2016 16:32:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 16:32:56 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) To: Tino Calancha , Andreas Schwab , Eli Zaretskii , drew.adams@oracle.com, Emacs developers Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 26 18:32:52 2016 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 1boYpn-00034s-Co for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 18:32:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45652 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1boYpl-000502-PL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:32:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33849) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1boYoj-0004xn-Bp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:31:46 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1boYoi-0005xp-8c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:31:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com ([209.85.220.54]:36547) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1boYod-0005w1-B6; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:31:39 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id qn7so47118851pac.3; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:31:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:date:to:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references:user-agent :mime-version; bh=FPtyNJDEDBEqHc8aSam9aqavi2J+jEIFX2tB1sX/Yq8=; b=fbMM3eG4txG1OLAi58rG6U6WdRCLLTN+5NfB3ezJlHy7wtuqQitPLB10xrHjChiS5p DsGf439oAMsbYNH3TDCGVcLUVjbgRCsXmvIZbRjxGSeZah7OvBTF365olH7Z5pNpvuJc +7UhgW2uMvvQbJpJxvZZU7tpk1tjPDzMWvkN4iszi192q1yN/yxCNlqmNLeCzVftjc9D +o6N1bVLoJUI+XqgosD8/tu14/t7IQdsL6lmmoSir2Z8k09GWwnWPiOGq/utBIqxMupD m2nFbal6svC1kCxwvBAbHGBjdqFffzUzKkVKrio4HYF7SMZNDnTDwrOIuo+qhyPx2neY kG6g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=FPtyNJDEDBEqHc8aSam9aqavi2J+jEIFX2tB1sX/Yq8=; b=C+hOlL7zjLUWDUFTtseaQE/LBOV7EASS0Q06axW7QzqH1eI4qPhhIpIDNnNM9+z5S/ NbpMKxL4YpA2FmIDdi3v9p+ujmDWAdohRzQxFNTmL3vpTkSAXFBoc6cscgduGB2qpspP vJc26ItiZ4uWTWqV/Ypy0b9v8L6ZI+8H4H4741wR+5r5ltDjWQXJerfrNwaZnM0m2KrS Qj8fd7JLkM8DIPVW2WOhHt3Fz5UurxN2RFmQuiGwTSI30BWydCt0bIYKL0NkBVYJaYDn 4DeG4WFgTmlcsjDlQryPuTH91dT8/hqTSb9/IG06eZlCE0EILydTZb+D1H3CZIBRdLh/ a5+w== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPLL64g4xyzmi/lvjJi9+qqjnaZtloWeIqHfiU22AEgeb7DJfJukcDyHf2HyBHQ3w== X-Received: by 10.66.144.5 with SMTP id si5mr39837997pab.158.1474907438657; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:30:38 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from calancha-pc (57.92.100.220.dy.bbexcite.jp. [220.100.92.57]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bn9sm32314954pab.39.2016.09.26.09.30.36 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:30:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-From: Tino Calancha X-X-Sender: calancha@calancha-pc In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.220.54 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:207816 Archived-At: On Mon, 26 Sep 2016, John Wiegley wrote: >>>>>> Tino Calancha writes: > >> In addition, i don't think you should unconditionaly object just because Eli >> object. > > Eli and I happen to agree on this: We don't want to change a long-standing > feature, however poorly conceived, without greater conviction. I commented in > the bug thread on the things I'd like to see happen next. > > Also, you shouldn't query Richard for his opinion, you should query everyone. > Richard is not going to countermand our decision; convince us and the > community that it's wise to make this change, and we will. So for I think only > 5 people total have participated in this discussion. Sorry for that. I missunderstood your request. I asked him after you wrote in the bug report: ----- 1. Begin a discussion on emacs-devel about the behavior of this command. Solicit the wisdom of other old-timers on that list. Present your case dispassionately, in terms of what we gain from such a change. ----- I am still new here and i don't know who are the old-timers. The first comes to my mind of course is Richard. I wish to ask S. Kremer, that would be great, but i have never seen him in this list so i am afraid he could pass away (?). If that is the case, someone could be hurt if i try to contact him. About beging a discussion on emacs-devel about this. Well, i guess we already have this one: people can give us input here. If we open another thread we will have 1 bug report + 2 emacs-dev thread basically talking the same. Not too tidy. > I believe Eli has proposed a solution that offers a middle ground. Can we move > to discussing that? Yes, we can talk about that. Eli suggestion would be consistent with Dired if, for instance: I) C-u * . el RET ;; unmark II) C-u C-u * . el RET ;; prompt for the marker char. IMO we should not put extra care in one hypothetical user X who spend 22 years doing: C-u 65 * . el RET I mean, we should not invert the number of C-u's in I) II), because: 1) It's impossible such X user does exists (at least in this Universe); and in case sh?e does exist i wish i will never face this person at night in a lonely dark street; or i would have a drink with her to explain that we are in XXI century, and now the computers accept text when they prompt for a character. Who knows, maybe after that she pay the drinks. 2) We private zillions of 'real' Dired users to naturally unmark files by extension as they like to do with other Dired marking commands.