From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David.Kastrup@t-online.de (David Kastrup) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposed new minor mode Date: 07 Jun 2003 12:47:51 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200306070151.h571pAe29047@eel.dms.auburn.edu> <3995-Sat07Jun2003121259+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> <200306071030.h57AUwl29375@eel.dms.auburn.edu> Reply-To: dak@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1054985113 6242 80.91.224.249 (7 Jun 2003 11:25:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 11:25:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 07 13:25:10 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19Obos-0001cO-00 for ; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 13:25:10 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19Oc7t-0001ss-00 for ; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 13:44:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19ObiG-0002IL-2Q for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 07:18:20 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19Obey-0001dj-KM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 07:14:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19ObZO-0000Rc-1r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 07:09:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mailout06.sul.t-online.com ([194.25.134.19]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19ObFT-0006uC-WB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 06:48:36 -0400 Original-Received: from fwd03.aul.t-online.de by mailout06.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 19ObF2-0001GR-0B; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 12:48:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost.localdomain (V8v74vZ18eha075d4jteGR5GPHfSgvY61OLIsCSb6Jd7vmY25aUMUC@[62.226.11.199]) by fwd03.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 19ObEy-1gsESm0; Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:48:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h57Alutf004779; Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:48:01 +0200 Original-Received: (from dak@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h57AlqcC004775; Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:47:52 +0200 Original-To: Luc Teirlinck In-Reply-To: <200306071030.h57AUwl29375@eel.dms.auburn.edu> Original-Lines: 48 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 X-Seen: false X-ID: V8v74vZ18eha075d4jteGR5GPHfSgvY61OLIsCSb6Jd7vmY25aUMUC@t-dialin.net Original-cc: eliz@elta.co.il X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:14871 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:14871 Luc Teirlinck writes: > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Let the users who need this type "M-x vis-mode-disable RET" or > some such. > > Whether we need a binding for this or not is a different matter. > But it would seem (given the current implementation) that every > user, even, or I would say especially, a novice user, would need to > use the command at least once (actually twice, because it needs to > be disabled again), because otherwise the confusion when killing and > yanking, printing part of the buffer, using commands like M-x man > and the like, is going to be too big. The surprise is not ameliorated by the availability of a command toggling some visibility. The novice user caught by surprise will not think "Oh, I should have called vis-mode-disable in order not get this". > The user needs to be aware the text is there, because sooner or > later he is going to be confronted with it. And then he will get aware of it. > If the text were erased, instead of being made invisible, that would > be a different matter, but that is not how it is currently > implemented. I do not know of any plans to implement it that way. Strange. I think I read the contention several times that it would be a good idea to edit the buffer, making the text better match the appearance. > Killing and yanking are not just commands for advanced users and > there are plenty of reasons to kill and yank text from info buffers. Sure, but if we have an inconsistency there, the solution is to fix it instead of providing a command nobody would ever think of using, because it only uglifies the current buffer and does not cause anything different to be yanked to the destination buffer. It won't do a harm to have such a mode for debugging info files and their display, and other invisibility matters, but it would be an illusion to think that it would be of major interest to novices, or help them much. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum