From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Menu commands to M-x history? Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:34:15 +0200 Message-ID: References: <9D1E3CE97BF4491E973F872B00D6277D@us.oracle.com> <916D7A0558D14A809114127E47A21BB2@us.oracle.com> <813B2CD970B1498EA104EBAE7CD12620@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1248730494 28529 80.91.229.12 (27 Jul 2009 21:34:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:34:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, Mathias Dahl To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 27 23:34:47 2009 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 4.50) id 1MVXqA-0003jL-K0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:34:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55007 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MVXqA-0002nK-1B for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:34:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MVXpy-0002gA-61 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:34:26 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MVXpt-0002ZN-8Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:34:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33102 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MVXps-0002Yt-SS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:34:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yw0-f181.google.com ([209.85.211.181]:36224) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MVXpo-00018J-GL; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:34:16 -0400 Original-Received: by ywh11 with SMTP id 11so462369ywh.26 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:34:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bmyDE+i5o67QRmtlh89l02edoiMAdQeTkfibKtp4uRU=; b=xj4P+Ldzi2jG2sDj8Poc/hgyjr7zqW9pPdIMwzV09KIAtTB9KF/WLnrF0/EGthT+Q6 d/oQ/ZmIk+QZx6FqhRDtAV7Sll4kHpigBc4FDNGJLX0HcFdElJ8qtYsGcnwzCiWSD1P7 a97LA87NfjR7lFT680/GpLyc75kqGL3zjg3/o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=TsT0SSG/bRdgCJlNdORbDINSdgQADtbXc4oyn6NChy0Sz+t4Wowwk04wPt8c3+gQd6 GpuHoJHGLMc1rXEbLJNF//sb2vqrSn6ojAGrGNUplLffBfzV+zRucvmQZFvYA3hSlC7F /2wJW+WqEz+MWNrqA2NunBRVpDWovhLiYD84c= Original-Received: by 10.100.127.4 with SMTP id z4mr8836328anc.129.1248730455502; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:34:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <813B2CD970B1498EA104EBAE7CD12620@us.oracle.com> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:113256 Archived-At: On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:16 PM, Drew Adams wrote: > Yes. But I don't think convincing me is your biggest obstacle. I don't see > anyone else even agreeing that menu-invoked commands can be useful in the > history. No, there is normally not much interest in features for new users. I guess it is kind of natural since they are not here, but I see no other way/place to argue for them than here. The outcomes of such discussions often (but not always) are very small however - and that is a problem. I wonder how many times we have suggested to change the menus for example. Maybe it is a matter of how the people that do discuss agree/disagree. You and I have for example not come to any useful conclusion here. We disagree and can't find any way to get further. Our failure to do so might be the real obstacle. My feeling is that I can't argue for your solution. It is too complicated for me. It would miss the goal I was trying to reach. Maybe your suggestions can be useful for advanced users, I do not know. However, drawing some conclusions what I have learned from political discussions is that one way to make a suggestion collapse is to find problems with it to early instead of beeing positively creative. It might be unavoidable here since we both have ideas of how to do things. But it might also be a certain culture here that makes us go into some kind of decision before we have actually got a broad picture of the alternatives. The usual suggestion for finding creative solutions is to not argue against them to start with, rather trying to build a creative view. However it is difficult, maybe because we are communicating this rather cumbersome way. Direct face to face interaction seems better for quick grasping of things (if you get into the right mode).