emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Visual cleanup for customize buffers


From: Luc Teirlinck
Subject: Re: Visual cleanup for customize buffers
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:32:30 -0600 (CST)

Lennart Borgman wrote:

   Would it perhaps be easy to make it impossible to hide a value that has 
   been changed and not set in the current custom buffer? That could 
   perhaps be a bit less confusing.

If I understand correctly, it is already supposed to be impossible
right now.  You should get the minibuffer message: "There are unset changes".
Was there some case where this failed for you?

So normally, you will never inadvertently fail to Set or Save a value
that you have edited, if you use the whole buffer "Set for Current
Session" or "Save for Future Sessions" buttons.  You will never
inadvertently keep edits you did not want to keep if you use the whole
buffer "Undo Edits" button.

What you can do however, is, for instance, set a value for the current
session, and then hide it.  Then edit other options and save those for
future sessions.  The one you had only set for the current session
will not be saved.  Also, if you have a saved value for an option, and
hide it before choosing "Erase Customization", that saved value will
not be erased.

According to Kim's theory, if I understand it correctly, people
accustomed to the "Apply-OK-Cancel" type interface would never
use anything but the whole buffer "Save for Future Sessions",
"Undo Edits" (and "Finish") buttons.  In that case, the fact that
these buttons will not work on hidden items will _never_ inconvenience
them, because there will be no hidden edited items.

Note that in the many years that this feature existed (as long as
Custom has been part of Emacs), there was not exactly a flood of
complaints by people having been surprised or inconvenienced by it.
I know of none (before yesterday).  Complaints only started after I
pointed the feature out, from people who did not know it existed, and
hence probably had never been affected by the feature either.

Sincerely,

Luc.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]