[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: delete-selection-mode as default
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: delete-selection-mode as default |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Sep 2018 21:30:28 +0300 |
> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 10:42:21 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,
> address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,
> address@hidden, address@hidden
>
> > > What's the real use case for such temporary enabling/disabling of d-s-m?
> > > And how is it different from just, well, enabling/disabling d-s-m?
> >
> > People who are against turning on delete-selection-mode presented
> > several such use cases.
>
> I don't think so. I think you just postulated it, without any example.
> Did someone who is against using d-s-m actually say that s?he
> wanted to use it temporarily (and without turning d-s-m on,
> whatever that means)?
>
> But I could be wrong - it's a long thread. Feel free to point us to
> some mention by someone of such a use case. Or if that's not
> possible, please remind us of (describe) such a case.
Look for messages from Alan and Richard. I cannot afford searching
for them, life is too short.
> > > In any case, how do you envision enabling/disabling d-s-m as something
> > > different from turning d-s-m on/off? If you want some key(s) to
> > > enable/disable it, how is that different from just binding a key
> > > (or keys) to `delete-selection-mode'?
> >
> > Why don't you ask the same question about transient-mark-mode?
>
> Why do you think I should do that?
Because in that case we have a few commands that temporarily turn on
transient-mark-mode. We don't tell users to turn it on and off
explicitly. I thought it might be a good idea to have a similar
feature for delete-selection-mode.
> What's a use case for doing that, and how do you see someone
> doing it (other than by hitting a key bound to d-s-m, for example)?
See above: asked and answered.
> > My idea was to extend the feature of region activation, which
> > would avoid the need for turning on and off the mode.
>
> Why don't you please clarify that idea? What is it that you intend
> for users to do, to enable/disable d-s-m "temporarily"?
Something similar to what we do for turning on transient-mark-mode
temporarily.
> Maybe I'm the only one who finds your proposal vague. I posted
> my questions about it only after it seemed that Yuri had the same,
> or similar questions. If you want me to understand - and I would
> like to, please try to elaborate.
I explained the idea in so many words several times already. If it's
still not clear, I guess I will have to give up.
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, (continued)
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/09/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Yuri Khan, 2018/09/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/09/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Yuri Khan, 2018/09/18
- RE: delete-selection-mode as default, Drew Adams, 2018/09/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/09/18
- RE: delete-selection-mode as default, Drew Adams, 2018/09/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Alan Mackenzie, 2018/09/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/09/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Richard Stallman, 2018/09/19
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Yuri Khan, 2018/09/20
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, hw, 2018/09/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/09/19
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, hw, 2018/09/19
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, Elias MÃ¥rtenson, 2018/09/14
- RE: delete-selection-mode as default, Drew Adams, 2018/09/14
- Re: delete-selection-mode as default, hw, 2018/09/15