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: thing-at-point's meaning of current sexp vs. up-list's: which is correct? Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:13:04 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1371087383.6558.YahooMailClassic@web141103.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1371132796 26244 80.91.229.3 (13 Jun 2013 14:13:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 14:13:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Kelly Dean Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 13 16:13:14 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 1Un8H4-0004be-DG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:13:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49044 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Un8H3-0008Av-VH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:13:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40599) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Un8H0-00089o-Az for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:13:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Un8Gv-0003Lf-7w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:13:10 -0400 Original-Received: from relais.videotron.ca ([24.201.245.36]:32740) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Un8Gv-0003LX-3s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:13:05 -0400 Original-Received: from ceviche.home ([24.201.64.104]) by VL-VM-MR002.ip.videotron.ca (Oracle Communications Messaging Exchange Server 7u4-22.01 64bit (built Apr 21 2011)) with ESMTP id <0MOC00IMC4TSWFC0@VL-VM-MR002.ip.videotron.ca> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:13:04 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 993F86610B; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:13:04 -0400 (EDT) In-reply-to: <1371087383.6558.YahooMailClassic@web141103.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 24.201.245.36 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:160412 Archived-At: > forward-sexp and er/expand-region agree with up-list's meaning, and it does > look like the right meaning. If thing-at-point is ad-hoc DWIM anyway, then > I don't see the advantage of it using a different meaning than the standard > for other functions. Because thing-at-point is dwimish: if you're right before a closing paren (and hence you block cursor is drawn on top of the closing paren), it's pretty clear that by "the sexp at point" you want to mean "the sexp that ends with the paren after point". > And kill-backward-up-list's implementation is short and elegant; dealing > with thing-at-point's different meaning would make it longer and ugly. DWIM basically means that it only makes sense for the user to call it, but not for Elisp code, because the dwimness tries to guess what a user would want, but what a piece of code would want is generally very different. Stefan