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: delete-selection-mode Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 20:53:30 +0100 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> <8739zy68n2.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1268855937 11216 80.91.229.12 (17 Mar 2010 19:58:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:58:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 17 20:58:53 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 1NrzOF-00032Z-Os for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 20:58:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39347 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NrzOF-0007WN-1R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:58:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NrzJT-0001XK-Ar for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:53:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=38631 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NrzJR-0001VM-OP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:53:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrzJQ-0003UV-2d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:53:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f210.google.com ([209.85.220.210]:55461) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrzJP-0003U8-Tw; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:53:52 -0400 Original-Received: by fxm2 with SMTP id 2so1511122fxm.26 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 12:53:50 -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 :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4fg2JgZ063NP5/ClDsquv+C3VSN/9mJ8s0a1nWWOZzs=; b=Z2GWhS/pu9J623VXZ0pRD83KMqItHtCqTdR1UnezZSfm3EGnXvRqHLQmr32Mc/+fXv NP+6cByXLTJDl7Zf3kTAosVQIneI4qoyXKKyBSBBbvadvwMdGYwXuGN5/pwP/e/CQ07h uTH13ODZ9NECfcgySOlNumc1koHDjnsAvCIVY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=qkVq1rF6fPiVY4g7osurYbqgnMtZiyg/aFA/2R4k9R+tsAaEQMtCA+mqJzfl7nBDlr ZbPmxTKcItzLKExIqLeswsTs/egP29MqxFNqap8Rs8LSoevymFpqr0zHUfPfD3Zebw/A 6mEY8vN1NElFdet9mkjSMxpg4/XqrE+3WxO+Q= Original-Received: by 10.239.148.137 with SMTP id f9mr198207hbb.132.1268855630148; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 12:53:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8739zy68n2.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.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:122105 Archived-At: On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 8:38 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >>> The answer is to ask them why they want this. >> >> Have not that been done many, many times - in the context of Emacs and >> in research on user-computer interaction. As far as I understand the >> answer is that new users most often want it to behave as they are used >> to from other applications. They want that exactly because it saves >> them time > > Once. > >> and avoids confusion (which also costs them time). >> >> I for one agree with that argument. > > It is valid, but an O(1) type of argument. It is a funny argument, but hardly valid. You must look much more carefully into the problem to see what is gained and what is lost. I have tried to explain that using defaults that are uncommon is very bad because it raises the complexity in an already complex situation for newcomers. You might compare the way the n-back game works for example. This sort of game is actually by some researchers believed to increase working memory and intelligence, something that was thought to be impossible before. It does this, however, by gradually making the game more difficult as the user gets better at playing it. If a user is started on a difficult level no gains or slow gains will be made. > It will not outweigh O(n) > arguments even with a small factor eventually. =C2=A0If something costs t= ime > repeatedly, saving startup time is not worth the trouble when we are > catering about being efficient on a continuing base. > > I already gave a recipe for making mouse-centric people happy with a > mouse-centric subset of delete-selection-mode. > > Nobody even bothered to read it, apparently. I hope some mouse-centric people will read it. However Emacs users normally do not use the mouse very much. Maybe some newcomers do.