[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#14940: 24.3.50; [PATCH] enhancement for `dired-hide-details-mode'
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
bug#14940: 24.3.50; [PATCH] enhancement for `dired-hide-details-mode' |
Date: |
Mon, 4 Nov 2013 09:35:47 -0800 (PST) |
> > We should stick to a single command and its key binding,
>
> That's exactly the goal of my proposal: users only need to know
> about a single command "dired-hide-details-default-mode" and a
> single custom var "dired-hide-details-default-mode". They could
> ignore the buffer-local dired-hide-details-mode, since it would be
> automatically controlled by dired-hide-details-default-mode.
It's not clear to me just what the behavior is that you are
proposing. Perhaps we are on the same page; I can't tell.
As I said:
> But if the *same* behavior is offered by your proposal as by mine,
> and if users are not additionally bothered by your proposal, then
> I guess I don't see a problem with it. (That's an if.)
>
> IMO:
>
> 1. The out-of-the-box default behavior should be as I described.
>
> 2. Users should be able to set their own preferred default behavior
> persistently. To me, that means a user option. In any case, it
> means not having to toggle anything interactively just to get the
> preferred behavior as the saved one.
>
> 3. If the rest of the behavior I described is also provided, no
> problem.
>
> In sum, it's the behavior I'm interested in. If the behavior is
> intact then I don't care much how you decide to implement it.