From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Upcoming merge of adaptive-wrap Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:18:46 -0500 Message-ID: References: <878r4eqjh8.fsf.ref@yahoo.com> <878r4eqjh8.fsf@yahoo.com> <87ede5u3yd.fsf@gmx.net> <87cyto4izl.fsf@gmail.com> <86cytoqqma.fsf@p200300d6271a6826d8930e2e0a09f063.dip0.t-ipconnect.de> <86y1cc9sj3.fsf@gnu.org> <86cytop5c1.fsf@p200300d6271a6826d8930e2e0a09f063.dip0.t-ipconnect.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="21177"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , kevin.legouguec@gmail.com, stephen.berman@gmx.net, luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Joost Kremers Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 31 20:21:05 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rVG8u-0005Gz-Eg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 20:21:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVG83-0004wS-K0; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:20:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVG81-0004vx-DN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:20:09 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVG7z-0003hb-GW; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:20:09 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id F14631000E4; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:20:03 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1706728803; bh=JRD1iDaL2iDXB/xYZAnUCNpJhi2LMzgtAJRyQOjZ5AU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=iJ1yHmyzkEg2045WHwbyAqWghbofI6VXxlmqErrJZ4SWssQJiLcCLc61WV74hKMDb 0n1HAUemZ+q+ktsn9zq8r/1n4O7lITH9s7kLIO22dkS4in8B9P167BtuL6kYHt6vUd VcCmj58l4y5ccfIWreO/I5M+2JMk9v/APxRM2ACXk6QMKI7DQ3XVJIXb3mLAH2IodO kTNKU4zvOJewBOSe5kO9JaElSupM/k6AwjpFk7htqx+865C5tYGWCrioatmEvTsqxM cf0wpk6adIYWG51hftmsS65r9MCu+mPra9D3CYPQyouU0bz2AdWqXa/laKFAbBVNAc rbqmP9mUOin0g== Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 02934100068; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:20:03 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from lechazo (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E0169120C61; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:20:02 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <86cytop5c1.fsf@p200300d6271a6826d8930e2e0a09f063.dip0.t-ipconnect.de> (Joost Kremers's message of "Fri, 26 Jan 2024 14:47:42 +0100") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:315681 Archived-At: Joost Kremers [2024-01-26 14:47:42] wrote: > On Fri, Jan 26 2024, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>> From: Joost Kremers >>> Wouldn't it make more sense to make this simply a configurable option in >>> visual-line-mode, that defaults to "on"? From a user's perspective, I think >>> that makes the most sense, doesn't it? At least I personally have always >>> wondered why this is a separate package and not part of visual-line-mode. >> What does it mean for this to be a configurable option of >> visual-line-mode? How is it different from turning on another minor >> mode? > My thinking was that this is something a user would probably want to have > enabled by default (I do, anyway), and for that, a Configure option seems the > logical choice. [ A global minor mode also gives you a Configure option :-) ] But should it be tied to `visual-line-mode` (as opposed to, say, the value of `word-wrap`)? Stefan