[debbugs-tracker] bug#17951: closed (Subword-mode should support shift selection in and out of cua-mode)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Tue, 08 Jul 2014 09:54:14 -0400
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#17951: Subword-mode should support shift selection in 
and out of cua-mode
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #17951,
regarding Subword-mode should support shift selection in and out of cua-mode
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
17951: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=17951
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems

--- Begin Message --- Subject: Subword-mode should support shift selection in and out of cua-mode Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 23:31:49 -0500

Subword movement funtions should be specified as

(interactive "^p") instead of (interactive "p") to allow shift selection. 

When cua-mode is enabled, shift-selection is also enabled since all the functions have

(put 'subword-forward 'CUA 'move)

so, I think it should be consistent.

Just my 2 cents.

 

Matt

--- End Message ---

> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#17951: Subword-mode should support shift selection in and out of cua-mode
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Tue, 08 Jul 2014 09:54:14 -0400
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> >> Subword movement funtions should be specified as
> >> (interactive "^p") instead of (interactive "p") to allow shift selection. 
>
> AFAICT this is already the case in 24.3.92 (but yes, it was missing in
> 24.3).
>
> >> When cua-mode is enabled, shift-selection is also enabled since all the
> >> functions have
> >> (put 'subword-forward 'CUA 'move)
> >> so, I think it should be consistent.
>
> In 24.3.92, cua-mode does not use its own shift-selection implementation
> any more, so it is consistent by definition ;-)
>
> You bug report does not say in which version you saw those problems, so
> I'll assume it was 24.3 or earlier.  If you still see this problem in
> the pretest (24.3.92), then please re-open or make a new report
> providing additional details (e.g. indicating which commands are
> affected).
>
>
>         Stefan
>
>
> --- End Message ---