From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: More visible mini-buffer prompt face Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 12:20:43 +0100 Message-ID: References: <45DF1547.8010404@gmail.com> <7dbe73ed0702240958s6a54086bv1c6d2664571ea6bc@mail.gmail.com> <7dbe73ed0702250301m62343f14vb647e8de4806c772@mail.gmail.com> <7dbe73ed0702260245h15a48208r8c0898982068bb6e@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1172488866 20229 80.91.229.12 (26 Feb 2007 11:21:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 11:21:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Mathias Dahl" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 26 12:20:58 2007 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 1HLdua-0001I7-HG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 12:20:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HLduZ-0008W9-Va for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 06:20:55 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HLduQ-0008W1-7w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 06:20:46 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HLduO-0008Vp-KK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 06:20:45 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HLduO-0008Vm-H1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 06:20:44 -0500 Original-Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.244]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1HLduO-0006y1-7G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 06:20:44 -0500 Original-Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b8so730404ana for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 03:20:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Idz05lGHgL+0ir5EyzO0xmYuDMd9qIYpShILjOxNsb7PIa+TMba3OH9qojvALXmuqV93jll6GGXQjRS6JmTaty0LuBezMZ1Io3LhmBfSEdeSBqI1E1LjMXxZQ++/S0NlczzmoVXN6OeZJfQ2YB4d3eK4bxY7sqEsSve2vN0Y/Yg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=DaTFWlEMot/Hq92cMHo9dhr0iHG6rmyTgw+G0FhUtjlyoSD4nqkVNHmtPcVKo2jp1i4BKv++CZ9LNH+Uv++wnG17uOnFbcL7V+k0419E7OdW+GuN1MO09qs7VITnyeXQZmrlu6qjl7YtPN+kAgxNUer5V54n5H1sfJZOKpu7ub4= Original-Received: by 10.114.39.16 with SMTP id m16mr1276259wam.1172488843413; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 03:20:43 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.114.234.16 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 03:20:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7dbe73ed0702260245h15a48208r8c0898982068bb6e@mail.gmail.com> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: 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:66845 Archived-At: On 2/26/07, Mathias Dahl wrote: > Seriously, if we write a program where certain habits often > form for the users, I don't think it is the user's fault. Why not? In other aspects of life it is often the case that bad habits are the user's fault (no one would blame the car for the user driving under the influence of alcohol). Seriously, if a program asks you to type "yes" and press RETURN to confirm a possibly dangerous action, and you do look for ways to automatize skipping the question... what more could the program do? Isn't that obnoxious enough? Do we start an arms race between prompts and users? The answer given before ("do not prompt, let him do it and provide ways to undo") is good, but not always applicable. > However, it does not feel like this is the right thread, or time, to > discuss these, sometimes philosophical, matters... Oops. :) Juanma