From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: AW: AW: New undo element (fun . args) Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:13:10 +0100 Message-ID: References: <876514mmsn.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1107793026 7177 80.91.229.2 (7 Feb 2005 16:17:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 16:17:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 07 17:17:04 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBZK-0001Yf-OK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:16:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBnU-0001an-B7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:31:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBmc-0001JJ-P5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:30:43 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBmU-0001De-Qc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:30:34 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBmR-0001C6-B1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:30:31 -0500 Original-Received: from [212.88.64.25] (helo=mail-relay.sonofon.dk) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CyBVd-00068P-SE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:13:10 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 34081 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2005 16:13:08 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk) (213.83.150.2) by 0 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2005 16:13:08 -0000 Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: <876514mmsn.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> (Stefan Monnier's message of "Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:15:41 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) 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 X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:33017 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:33017 Stefan Monnier writes: > Actually my own local Emacs has a further hack such that when `undo' notices > it's actually undoing an undo it asks me whether I want to "redo" or not (if > not, it does what `undo-only' would have done, skipping the redo-undo pair). > This is an experiment and I'm not satisfied with it as it is (it's too > annoying). Ah, that explains this comment in simple.el: ;; Check to see whether we're hitting a redo record, and if ;; so, ask the user whether she wants to skip the redo/undo pair. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk