From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [patch] make electric-pair-mode smarter/more useful Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2013 22:34:36 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87haalh806.fsf@gmail.com> <87d2l9wfne.fsf@yandex.ru> <87fvq49xzp.fsf@gmail.com> <87vbyuwyyc.fsf@gmail.com> <52A93B99.8040308@yandex.ru> <87r49if185.fsf@gmail.com> <52AA772D.7050503@yandex.ru> <52AC8DA6.5070403@yandex.ru> <87ppoxaaz4.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1387164892 14011 80.91.229.3 (16 Dec 2013 03:34:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 03:34:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Dmitry Gutov To: joaotavora@gmail.com (=?windows-1252?B?Sm/jbyBU4XZvcmE=?=) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 16 04:34:57 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VsOxN-0002za-Ct for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 04:34:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53570 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VsOxM-0004yW-VQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 15 Dec 2013 22:34:56 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34213) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VsOxD-0004yI-Qs for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Dec 2013 22:34:55 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VsOx6-0000dJ-HR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Dec 2013 22:34:47 -0500 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:42309) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VsOx6-0000dF-C2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Dec 2013 22:34:40 -0500 Original-Received: from fmsmemgm.homelinux.net (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.DIT.UMontreal.CA (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id rBG3Ya9t001201; Sun, 15 Dec 2013 22:34:37 -0500 Original-Received: by fmsmemgm.homelinux.net (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 16314AE1D7; Sun, 15 Dec 2013 22:34:36 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87ppoxaaz4.fsf@gmail.com> (=?windows-1252?Q?=22Jo=E3o_T=E1vo?= =?windows-1252?Q?ra=22's?= message of "Mon, 16 Dec 2013 00:35:59 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4793=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9362 : core <4793> : inlines <324> : streams <1091392> : uri <1624989> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:166458 Archived-At: > I personally would prefer that the current rules would *not* be the > default in js-mode, as they are now, or any other mode). I understand what you're saying as "I don't like electric-layout-mode". FWIW, I agree with you. > Anyway, the default value should really be the newline-between-pairs > rule, which currently only kicks in when electric-pair-mode is > additionally enabled (btw, should it not?). Enabling electric-pair-mode is definitely not on the table for 24.4, no. >> From this POV, maybe electric-pair-newline-between-pairs-rule should be >> made into a separate minor mode, indeed. > This is also possible, but overkill IMO. I like the current triad of > electric modes. I don't think it's overkill at all. It should be a separate minor mode and default to enabled (but still conditional on electric-pair-mode). I.e. make it part of electric-pair-mode and not try to shoe-horn it into electric-layout-mode. I may have stated the opposite earlier, but I think it's pretty clear to me, now, that the purpose of electric-layout-mode is different. Stefan