* `inhibit-mark-movement' @ 2004-12-08 0:56 Paul Pogonyshev 2004-12-08 3:08 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Paul Pogonyshev @ 2004-12-08 0:56 UTC (permalink / raw) In Transient Mark mode commands that use `inhibit-mark-movement' variable have one more desirable (to me, at least) behaviour: When in transient mark mode and the mark is active, don't move it. If the mark is inactive, do move it. The latter is useful because it enable popping to the position where command was invoked. In other words, I'd like these two scenarios be possible simultaneously (in Transient Mark mode): 1. Select text from point to the end of function: C-SPC C-M-e 2. Glance at buffer beginning and go back: M-< C-u C-SPC We could make any non-nil and non-t value activate the descrubed behaviour. Will a patch for this be accepted? Maybe `inhibit-mark-movement' should also be made customizable? Paul ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-08 0:56 `inhibit-mark-movement' Paul Pogonyshev @ 2004-12-08 3:08 ` Stefan Monnier 2004-12-08 15:40 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Paul Pogonyshev 2004-12-08 3:29 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 2004-12-08 3:46 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 2 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-08 3:08 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel > In other words, I'd like these two scenarios be possible > simultaneously (in Transient Mark mode): > 1. Select text from point to the end of function: C-SPC C-M-e > 2. Glance at buffer beginning and go back: M-< C-u C-SPC I don't understand: just turning on transient-mark-mode, I get exactly this behavior. No need to fiddle with inhibit-mark-movement. What am I missing? Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-08 3:08 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-08 15:40 ` Paul Pogonyshev 2004-12-08 16:59 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 2004-12-08 17:59 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Paul Pogonyshev @ 2004-12-08 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel Stefan Monnier wrote: > > In other words, I'd like these two scenarios be possible > > simultaneously (in Transient Mark mode): > > > > 1. Select text from point to the end of function: C-SPC C-M-e > > > > 2. Glance at buffer beginning and go back: M-< C-u C-SPC > > I don't understand: just turning on transient-mark-mode, I get exactly > this behavior. No need to fiddle with inhibit-mark-movement. > What am I missing? Sorry, the first scenario is wrong. It should read this way: 1. Select text from point to somewhere else: C-SPC C-M-e / C-n... where C-M-e and C-n (or something similar) can be mixed. What I'm trying to suggest is that commands should not modify active mark in Transient Mark mode _by side effect_. Commands like M-h are fine to modify mark, because they _activate_ it. If command is not meant to activate mark and the mark is active, the command should not touch it at all, because I activated mark exactly where I wanted it to be. If the mark is inactive, commands can alter it, because this is not intrusive for Transient Mark mode users and is useful for popping to previous mark positions. Juri Linkov wrote: > I already encountered the same problem some time ago. I fixed it as > below and really like this. It makes use of transient-mark-mode > more natural: the mark should not be changed when it is active. > If there is a need to set a new mark when the mark is already > active, it's possible to deactivates the current region with C-g, > and set a new mark. I didn't try your patch, but looks like it implements exactly what I'm trying to explain. Except that I proposed to make this behaviour optional. However, this behaviour seems much more natural to me, so maybe customization is not necessary if we don't mind surprising a few users. Juri Linkov wrote: > > I'd like these two scenarios be possible simultaneously (in > > Transient Mark mode): > > > > 1. Select text from point to the end of function: C-SPC C-M-e > > > > 2. Glance at buffer beginning and go back: M-< C-u C-SPC > > You can achieve the desired result with 3 more keys: > > 1. Select text from point to the end of function: C-SPC C-M-e > > 2. Glance at buffer beginning and go back: C-g M-< C-u C-SPC C-x C-x > === === === Yes, you are right, but I meant "simultaneously" in that sense that I don't want to evaluate `(setq inhibit-mark-movement ...)' before realization of either of scenarios. Paul ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-08 15:40 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Paul Pogonyshev @ 2004-12-08 16:59 ` Stefan Monnier 2004-12-08 17:59 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-08 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Juri Linkov, emacs-devel > What I'm trying to suggest is that commands should not modify active mark > in Transient Mark mode _by side effect_. Commands like M-h are fine to > modify mark, because they _activate_ it. If command is not meant to > activate mark and the mark is active, the command should not touch it at > all, because I activated mark exactly where I wanted it to be. If the > mark is inactive, commands can alter it, because this is not intrusive > for Transient Mark mode users and is useful for popping to previous mark > positions. That sounds right. And IIUC this change would only affect users of transient-mark-mde, i.e. users who are likely to actually immediately *see* when the behavior is different from what they expect. Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-08 15:40 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Paul Pogonyshev 2004-12-08 16:59 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-08 17:59 ` Juri Linkov 2004-12-08 19:22 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-08 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: monnier, emacs-devel Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev@gmx.net> writes: > What I'm trying to suggest is that commands should not modify active > mark in Transient Mark mode _by side effect_. Commands like M-h are > fine to modify mark, because they _activate_ it. Yes, such commands are fine to modify mark. But they should not _reset_ it. If I have selected a few words with M-@ in transient-mark-mode, and have adjusted the beginning of the region with a simple point movement command, I expect that the next M-@ will continue to extend the region at its end, not to start a new one as it currently does if consecutive commands are not the same. Just a few days ago I looked at mark activation commands, and fixed them (`mark-word', `mark-sexp', `mark-paragraph', `mark-defun') to support transient-mark-mode. The patch is below. It could be installed as well. > I didn't try your patch, but looks like it implements exactly what > I'm trying to explain. Except that I proposed to make this > behaviour optional. However, this behaviour seems much more natural > to me, so maybe customization is not necessary if we don't mind > surprising a few users. Very likely this behavior is what most users of transient-mark-mode would expect. Index: lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp.el =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/emacs/emacs/lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp.el,v retrieving revision 1.58 diff -u -r1.58 lisp.el --- lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp.el 12 Oct 2004 16:05:55 -0000 1.58 +++ lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp.el 8 Dec 2004 17:32:50 -0000 @@ -76,7 +76,8 @@ If this command is repeated, it marks the next ARG sexps after the ones already marked." (interactive "P") - (cond ((and (eq last-command this-command) (mark t)) + (cond ((or (and (eq last-command this-command) (mark t)) + (and transient-mark-mode mark-active)) (setq arg (if arg (prefix-numeric-value arg) (if (> (mark) (point)) 1 -1))) (set-mark @@ -292,7 +297,8 @@ If this command is repeated, marks more defuns after the ones already marked." (interactive) - (cond ((and (eq last-command this-command) (mark t)) + (cond ((or (and (eq last-command this-command) (mark t)) + (and transient-mark-mode mark-active)) (set-mark (save-excursion (goto-char (mark)) Index: lisp/textmodes/paragraphs.el =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/emacs/emacs/lisp/textmodes/paragraphs.el,v retrieving revision 1.75 diff -u -r1.75 paragraphs.el --- lisp/textmodes/paragraphs.el 9 Oct 2004 18:49:01 -0000 1.75 +++ lisp/textmodes/paragraphs.el 8 Dec 2004 17:16:52 -0000 @@ -363,7 +363,8 @@ (unless arg (setq arg 1)) (when (zerop arg) (error "Cannot mark zero paragraphs")) - (cond ((and (eq last-command this-command) (mark t)) + (cond ((or (and (eq last-command this-command) (mark t)) + (and transient-mark-mode mark-active)) (set-mark (save-excursion (goto-char (mark)) Index: lisp/simple.el =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/emacs/emacs/lisp/simple.el,v retrieving revision 1.669 diff -u -r1.669 simple.el --- lisp/simple.el 3 Dec 2004 22:26:13 -0000 1.669 +++ lisp/simple.el 8 Dec 2004 17:37:26 -0000 @@ -3528,7 +3600,8 @@ If this command is repeated, it marks the next ARG words after the ones already marked." (interactive "p") - (cond ((and (eq last-command this-command) (mark t)) + (cond ((or (and (eq last-command this-command) (mark t)) + (and transient-mark-mode mark-active)) (set-mark (save-excursion (goto-char (mark)) -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-08 17:59 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-08 19:22 ` Stefan Monnier 2004-12-09 1:48 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 2004-12-17 16:11 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-08 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, Paul Pogonyshev > Just a few days ago I looked at mark activation commands, and fixed > them (`mark-word', `mark-sexp', `mark-paragraph', `mark-defun') to > support transient-mark-mode. The patch is below. It could be > installed as well. I wouldn't call that "fix", rather "change". It's not like the current behavior is clearly broken and your suggested new one is The Right Way. Maybe your new behavior is overall preferable, I don't know, but I do know that it would surprise me (I use transient-mark-mode and M-C-SPC pretty heavily). Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-08 19:22 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-09 1:48 ` Juri Linkov 2004-12-13 19:51 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Richard Stallman 2004-12-17 16:11 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-09 1:48 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: pogonyshev, emacs-devel Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes: > I wouldn't call that "fix", rather "change". It's not like the current > behavior is clearly broken and your suggested new one is The Right Way. > > Maybe your new behavior is overall preferable, I don't know, but I do know > that it would surprise me (I use transient-mark-mode and M-C-SPC pretty > heavily). Yes, it's rather change than a fix, but I believe it is a change for the better. It's too bad when M-C-SPC deactivates the marked region if a previous command is not a M-C-SPC, but some other point movement command used to change the beginning of the marked region. Currently M-C-SPC starts marking a new region even in the region is active. But to start a new region it is possible to deactivate the current region with C-g, and start a new marking. So it's not a problem. There was no release where consequent marking commands extend the region. So it's not too late to change this behavior. This change also allows to do such useful things as switching the direction of the region marking, i.e. M-C-SPC C-x C-x M-C-SPC M-C-SPC and it continues extending the region in the reverse direction towards the beginning of the buffer. Another C-x C-x M-C-SPC and it continues extending the marked region forwards again. -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-09 1:48 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-13 19:51 ` Richard Stallman 2004-12-13 23:17 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Richard Stallman @ 2004-12-13 19:51 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, monnier, pogonyshev Currently M-C-SPC starts marking a new region even in the region is active. But to start a new region it is possible to deactivate the current region with C-g, and start a new marking. So it's not a problem. There was no release where consequent marking commands extend the region. So it's not too late to change this behavior. This change also allows to do such useful things as switching the direction of the region marking, i.e. M-C-SPC C-x C-x M-C-SPC M-C-SPC and it continues extending the region in the reverse direction towards the beginning of the buffer. Another C-x C-x M-C-SPC and it continues extending the marked region forwards again. It sounds like a good change. Stefan, are you convinced? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-13 19:51 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Richard Stallman @ 2004-12-13 23:17 ` Stefan Monnier 2004-12-14 10:55 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-13 23:17 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Juri Linkov, emacs-devel, pogonyshev > Currently M-C-SPC starts marking a new region even in the region is > active. But to start a new region it is possible to deactivate the > current region with C-g, and start a new marking. So it's not > a problem. There was no release where consequent marking commands > extend the region. So it's not too late to change this behavior. > This change also allows to do such useful things as switching the > direction of the region marking, i.e. M-C-SPC C-x C-x M-C-SPC M-C-SPC > and it continues extending the region in the reverse direction towards > the beginning of the buffer. Another C-x C-x M-C-SPC and it continues > extending the marked region forwards again. > It sounds like a good change. Stefan, are you convinced? Not really, but I don't think my opinion should have any special value here. I'm after all not the typical user and I'm biased because I've gotten used to the current behavior. If people like it, go for it. I might even end up liking it as well, who knows. Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-13 23:17 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-14 10:55 ` Juri Linkov 2004-12-14 11:24 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-14 10:55 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, rms, pogonyshev Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes: >> It sounds like a good change. Stefan, are you convinced? > > Not really, but I don't think my opinion should have any special value here. > I'm after all not the typical user and I'm biased because I've gotten used > to the current behavior. If people like it, go for it. I might even end up > liking it as well, who knows. I noticed that in one half of situations I needed to start a new region with M-C-SPC, in another half to extend the active region. But while starting a new region is easy after C-g or C-SPC, extending the existing region was not possible at all. It is too inconvenient to start from scratch when the last command was not M-C-SPC, and to repeat a sequence of M-C-SPC to restore the previous region before continuing to extend it further. -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-14 10:55 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-14 11:24 ` Stefan Monnier 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-14 11:24 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, rms, pogonyshev > I noticed that in one half of situations I needed to start a new > region with M-C-SPC, in another half to extend the active region. > But while starting a new region is easy after C-g or C-SPC, extending > the existing region was not possible at all. Huh? Just do C-x C-x and then C-M-f or C-M-b (instead of C-M-SPC) as needed. E.g.: C-M-SPC C-M-SPC M-b C-x C-x C-M-f C-M-f I'm not claiming it's more convenient, just pointing out that it can be done in a way that's not particularly inconvenient (e.g. I use it every once in a while, tho it's mostly when I've hit C-M-SPC too many times and need to step back a bit). Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-08 19:22 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 2004-12-09 1:48 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-17 16:11 ` Juri Linkov 2004-12-20 10:56 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Richard Stallman 1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-17 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw) There is another issue related to active marks in Transient Mark mode, which I believe is a bug: C-u C-SPC behaves differently when the mark ring is empty and when it is not. With the non-empty mark ring C-u C-SPC deactivates the mark when the mark is active. This is good. But when the mark ring is empty C-u C-SPC doesn't deactivate the mark. Such behaviour is unexpected since the state of the mark ring is irrelevant to that operation. I propose the following fix for `pop-mark' which deactivates the active mark regardless of the state of the mark ring: Index: lisp/simple.el =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/emacs/emacs/lisp/simple.el,v retrieving revision 1.672 diff -u -r1.672 simple.el --- lisp/simple.el 14 Dec 2004 12:17:43 -0000 1.672 +++ lisp/simple.el 17 Dec 2004 15:50:29 -0000 @@ -2945,10 +3013,10 @@ (when mark-ring (setq mark-ring (nconc mark-ring (list (copy-marker (mark-marker))))) (set-marker (mark-marker) (+ 0 (car mark-ring)) (current-buffer)) - (deactivate-mark) (move-marker (car mark-ring) nil) (if (null (mark t)) (ding)) - (setq mark-ring (cdr mark-ring)))) + (setq mark-ring (cdr mark-ring))) + (deactivate-mark)) (defalias 'exchange-dot-and-mark 'exchange-point-and-mark) (defun exchange-point-and-mark (&optional arg) -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-17 16:11 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-20 10:56 ` Richard Stallman 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Richard Stallman @ 2004-12-20 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel I propose the following fix for `pop-mark' which deactivates the active mark regardless of the state of the mark ring: It seems right to me. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-08 0:56 `inhibit-mark-movement' Paul Pogonyshev 2004-12-08 3:08 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier @ 2004-12-08 3:29 ` Juri Linkov 2004-12-08 3:46 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-08 3:29 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev@gmx.net> writes: > In Transient Mark mode commands that use `inhibit-mark-movement' > variable have one more desirable (to me, at least) behaviour: > > When in transient mark mode and the mark is active, don't > move it. If the mark is inactive, do move it. > > The latter is useful because it enable popping to the position > where command was invoked. I already encountered the same problem some time ago. I fixed it as below and really like this. It makes use of transient-mark-mode more natural: the mark should not be changed when it is active. If there is a need to set a new mark when the mark is already active, it's possible to deactivates the current region with C-g, and set a new mark. I could install the patch if everyone agrees. Index: lisp/simple.el =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/emacs/emacs/lisp/simple.el,v retrieving revision 1.669 diff -u -r1.669 simple.el --- lisp/simple.el 3 Dec 2004 22:26:13 -0000 1.669 +++ lisp/simple.el 8 Dec 2004 03:17:27 -0000 @@ -659,8 +663,10 @@ Don't use this command in Lisp programs! \(goto-char (point-min)) is faster and avoids clobbering the mark." (interactive "P") - (unless (or inhibit-mark-movement (consp arg)) - (push-mark)) + (or inhibit-mark-movement + (consp arg) + (and transient-mark-mode mark-active) + (push-mark)) (let ((size (- (point-max) (point-min)))) (goto-char (if (and arg (not (consp arg))) (+ (point-min) @@ -683,8 +689,10 @@ Don't use this command in Lisp programs! \(goto-char (point-max)) is faster and avoids clobbering the mark." (interactive "P") - (unless (or inhibit-mark-movement (consp arg)) - (push-mark)) + (or inhibit-mark-movement + (consp arg) + (and transient-mark-mode mark-active) + (push-mark)) (let ((size (- (point-max) (point-min)))) (goto-char (if (and arg (not (consp arg))) (- (point-max) Index: lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp.el =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/emacs/emacs/lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp.el,v retrieving revision 1.58 diff -u -r1.58 lisp.el --- lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp.el 12 Oct 2004 16:05:55 -0000 1.58 +++ lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp.el 8 Dec 2004 03:22:13 -0000 @@ -191,9 +192,11 @@ If variable `beginning-of-defun-function' is non-nil, its value is called as a function to find the defun's beginning." (interactive "p") - (and (eq this-command 'beginning-of-defun) - (or inhibit-mark-movement (eq last-command 'beginning-of-defun) - (push-mark))) + (or inhibit-mark-movement + (not (eq this-command 'beginning-of-defun)) + (eq last-command 'beginning-of-defun) + (and transient-mark-mode mark-active) + (push-mark)) (and (beginning-of-defun-raw arg) (progn (beginning-of-line) t))) @@ -242,9 +245,11 @@ If variable `end-of-defun-function' is non-nil, its value is called as a function to find the defun's end." (interactive "p") - (and (eq this-command 'end-of-defun) - (or inhibit-mark-movement (eq last-command 'end-of-defun) - (push-mark))) + (or inhibit-mark-movement + (not (eq this-command 'end-of-defun)) + (eq last-command 'end-of-defun) + (and transient-mark-mode mark-active) + (push-mark)) (if (or (null arg) (= arg 0)) (setq arg 1)) (if end-of-defun-function (if (> arg 0) -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: `inhibit-mark-movement' 2004-12-08 0:56 `inhibit-mark-movement' Paul Pogonyshev 2004-12-08 3:08 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 2004-12-08 3:29 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-08 3:46 ` Juri Linkov 2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2004-12-08 3:46 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev@gmx.net> writes: > I'd like these two scenarios be possible simultaneously (in > Transient Mark mode): > > 1. Select text from point to the end of function: C-SPC C-M-e > > 2. Glance at buffer beginning and go back: M-< C-u C-SPC You can achieve the desired result with 3 more keys: 1. Select text from point to the end of function: C-SPC C-M-e 2. Glance at buffer beginning and go back: C-g M-< C-u C-SPC C-x C-x === === === -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-12-20 10:56 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2004-12-08 0:56 `inhibit-mark-movement' Paul Pogonyshev 2004-12-08 3:08 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 2004-12-08 15:40 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Paul Pogonyshev 2004-12-08 16:59 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 2004-12-08 17:59 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 2004-12-08 19:22 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 2004-12-09 1:48 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 2004-12-13 19:51 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Richard Stallman 2004-12-13 23:17 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 2004-12-14 10:55 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 2004-12-14 11:24 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Stefan Monnier 2004-12-17 16:11 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 2004-12-20 10:56 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Richard Stallman 2004-12-08 3:29 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov 2004-12-08 3:46 ` `inhibit-mark-movement' Juri Linkov
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.