C-x d: don't make user have to retype misspelled dirs

C-x d: don't make user have to retype misspelled dirs

[Dan Jacobson]

Idea: don't make the user type the whole thing over again if he
misspells something, e.g. here
C-x d / v a r / l o <return>
-- 
http://jidanni.org/ Taiwan(04)25854780

Re: C-x d: don't make user have to retype misspelled dirs

[David Kastrup]

jidanni@deadspam.com (Dan Jacobson) writes:

> Idea: don't make the user type the whole thing over again if he
> misspells something, e.g. here
> C-x d / v a r / l o <return>

Type C-x C-v

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: David.Kastrup@t-online.de

Re: C-x d: don't make user have to retype misspelled dirs

[Dan Jacobson]

Dan>     Idea: don't make the user type the whole thing over again if he
Dan>     misspells something, e.g. here
Dan>     C-x d / v a r / l o <return>

RMS> After doing that, type C-x d M-p to get back what you typed.

er, um, Checkmate: how come C-x C-r in the same situation will not let
the user get away with a RET here, and instead does the comfy cosy
coaxing thing, whereas C-x d does the parental punishment thing.
-- 
http://jidanni.org/ Taiwan(04)25854780

Re: C-x d: don't make user have to retype misspelled dirs

[Dan Jacobson]

Dan>     Idea: don't make the user type the whole thing over again if he
Dan>     misspells something, e.g. here
Dan>     C-x d / v a r / l o <return>

RMS> After doing that, type C-x d M-p to get back what you typed.

er, um, Checkmate: how come C-x C-r in the same situation will not let
the user get away with a RET here, and instead does the comfy cosy
coaxing thing, whereas C-x d does the parental punishment thing.

Kastrup> Type C-x C-v
But then I still have to retype /var/lo, as it wiped it out upon RET.
-- 
http://jidanni.org/ Taiwan(04)25854780

Re: C-x d: don't make user have to retype misspelled dirs

[Richard Stallman]

    er, um, Checkmate: how come C-x C-r in the same situation will not let
    the user get away with a RET here, and instead does the comfy cosy
    coaxing thing, whereas C-x d does the parental punishment thing.

I don't follow what you are saying about C-x C-r.
Would you please be more explicit?

Re: C-x d: don't make user have to retype misspelled dirs

[Dan Jacobson]

Dan>     er, um, Checkmate: how come C-x C-r in the same situation will not let
Dan>     the user get away with a RET here, and instead does the comfy cosy
Dan>     coaxing thing, whereas C-x d does the parental punishment thing.

RMS> I don't follow what you are saying about C-x C-r.
RMS> Would you please be more explicit?

$ ls -d /var/lo*
/var/local  /var/lock  /var/log  /var/lost+found

C-x d / v a r / l o <return> C-x C-r / v a r / l o <return> <return>

Consider the treatment one gets on the first <return> vs. the second
and third.  The former is like tough luck bub, whereas the latter is
VIP helping environment warm & fuzzy.
-- 
http://jidanni.org/ Taiwan(04)25854780

Re: C-x d: don't make user have to retype misspelled dirs

[Dan Jacobson]

Dan>     C-x d / v a r / l o <return> C-x C-r / v a r / l o <return> <return>
Dan>     Consider the treatment one gets on the first <return> vs. the second
Dan>     and third.  The former is like tough luck bub, whereas the latter is
Dan>     VIP helping environment warm & fuzzy.

RMS> Do you mean the fact that it creates a buffer named `lo'?

Huh?  You must have thought I typed C-x C-f.  Are you not actually
typing my examples and instead using estimating? <sniff, and I thought
he was infallible>

Anyway, the idea is make C-x d have aforementioned warm & fuzzy
treatment, not just C-x C-r.
-- 
http://jidanni.org/ Taiwan(04)25854780

Re: C-x d: don't make user have to retype misspelled dirs

[Kevin Rodgers]

Dan Jacobson wrote:

> Dan>     er, um, Checkmate: how come C-x C-r in the same situation will not let
> Dan>     the user get away with a RET here, and instead does the comfy cosy
> Dan>     coaxing thing, whereas C-x d does the parental punishment thing.
> 
> RMS> I don't follow what you are saying about C-x C-r.
> RMS> Would you please be more explicit?
> 
> $ ls -d /var/lo*
> /var/local  /var/lock  /var/log  /var/lost+found
> 
> C-x d / v a r / l o <return> C-x C-r / v a r / l o <return> <return>
> 
> Consider the treatment one gets on the first <return> vs. the second
> and third.  The former is like tough luck bub, whereas the latter is
> VIP helping environment warm & fuzzy.

I believe this all comes back to the fact that there is only a single
`interactive' character code for reading a directory ("D"), and so
there isn't a way to distinguish between an existing directory and a
possibly nonexistent directory (cf. "f" and "F" for files).  Neither
is there a read-directory-name analogue for read-file-name, which
accepts an optional MUSTMATCH argument.

-- 
Kevin Rodgers <kevinr@ihs.com>