[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Shift selection using interactive spec
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Shift selection using interactive spec |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:42:10 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
Thomas Lord <address@hidden> writes:
> David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> I have to say that nothing so far indicates that your proposed
>> "tentative mark" would differ from the current behavior of "transient
>> marks".
>
> Um. Ok, take a buffer of text. M-x transient-mark-mode. Set a mark.
> Move a bit with C-n. Now hit G-g.
>
> The region is now "deactivated," sure. But type C-xC-x:
> the mark you set is still there. A *tentative* mark would
> be completely wiped out by the C-g.
That is basically just a matter of semantics. The command "C-x C-x" can
be thought of as setting the mark at point, and moving point where a
mark had been last.
> I've described why about 3 times already. Tentative marks always go
> away unless the user uses a key-sequence that preserves them or the
> command the user invokes is a rare variety that explicitly preserves
> it.
So the "advantage" of your "tentative mark" would be that "C-x C-x" now
beeps and does nothing. What does that buy the user?
> (I think if you look back at history you'll discover that
> transient-mark-mode was actually a mistake. It was
> in effect a crude attempt to hack around the lack of
> "tentative marks". People were confused but were happy
> that transient-mark-mode seemed to mostly highlight regions
> and mostly work like other GUIs, at least in simple cases).
> Tentative marks capture the familiar semantics much more
> precisely than transient ones.
By making it impossible to recreate a mark where one had been last time?
What's the advantage in providing strictly less functionality?
> Having looked at it more closely now, I would even suggest that
> transient-mark-mode be deprecated (as in dis-recommended for use and
> of low priority for compatibility, going forward).)
I don't get your point. You basically want to remove functionality and
sell this as an advantage under a different name.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
- Shift selection using interactive spec, Chong Yidong, 2008/03/13
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, Thomas Lord, 2008/03/13
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, David Kastrup, 2008/03/13
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, Thomas Lord, 2008/03/13
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, David Kastrup, 2008/03/14
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, Johan Bockgård, 2008/03/14
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, David Kastrup, 2008/03/14
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, Thomas Lord, 2008/03/14
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, Thomas Lord, 2008/03/14
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, Thomas Lord, 2008/03/14
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, Thomas Lord, 2008/03/14
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, David Kastrup, 2008/03/14
- Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, Thomas Lord, 2008/03/14
Re: Shift selection using interactive spec, Dan Nicolaescu, 2008/03/14