From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Robert J. Chassell" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Transient Mark Mode on by default Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 11:29:53 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1207049424 23944 80.91.229.12 (1 Apr 2008 11:30:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 11:30:24 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 01 13:30:54 2008 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 1Jgeha-0007Tc-9X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 13:30:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jgegy-0004vN-76 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:30:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jgegv-0004ud-3r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:30:13 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jgegt-0004rz-6O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:30:12 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jgegt-0004rr-36 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:30:11 -0400 Original-Received: from cpe-69-204-130-115.nycap.res.rr.com ([69.204.130.115] helo=rattlesnake.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jgegs-0007gT-Ne for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:30:10 -0400 Original-Received: by rattlesnake.com via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.115) Tue, 1 Apr 2008 11:29:53 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) 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:94105 Archived-At: So all-in-all I really don't see why everybody is making a lot of fuzz over making shift-select a 1st class emacs feature ... Except that is not what the arguments concerning Transient Mark mode are about. The question is whether to activate a region. The question comes up because the current action makes visible a mode of navigation that some people do not use. The arguments are not whether to have or what user interface to have to combine two commands. For example, an argument could regard a user interface, whether to use a shift key in a graphic environment when you move point and so at the same time select the region moved over. Instead of that argument or whether to have the commands combined, the arguments are different. One argument is whether to use an `interactive' function for that interface or to use something else, such as properties. A second argument is whether to continue to use the old meaning of mark. (The first argument looks forward twenty years and more; the second looks back twenty years and more.) A third argument is whether to activate a region with the same highlighting and under the same conditions that others use for navigation and/or discover with `exchange-point-and-mark' with the user interface `C-x C-x'. (That argument looks both forward and back.) -- Robert J. Chassell GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8 bob@rattlesnake.com bob@gnu.org http://www.rattlesnake.com http://www.teak.cc