[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: delete-selection-mode
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: delete-selection-mode |
Date: |
Thu, 18 Mar 2010 19:35:12 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.92 (gnu/linux) |
"Drew Adams" <address@hidden> writes:
> The risk you describe exists in theory, and I suppose it occurs
> occasionally in practice. But honestly, my impression is that you
> simply have not used d-s-mode much or this would not be a problem in
> practice.
>
> 99.999% (no, no proof; just a guess) of computer users out there use
> this "risky" behavior everyday, all day long, without exploding (and
> without Emac's powerful undo as a remedy).
It is an occasional occuring nuisance in one-line entry lines (where it
causes extra work), and it would be a perfect menace on multi-line
entry, but I don't know of any multi-line entry fields in applications
that don't have undo, most particular not with text editors.
So please match your descriptions of "the rest of the world" to existing
realities.
>> the accidental explosion hazard dominates for me (in non-Emacs
>> environments, where I can't disable the (mis)feature).
>
> Well now. That's JUST EXACTLY the problem we're trying to solve by
> making the Emacs default behavior resemble the behavior outside Emacs.
Applications outside of Emacs don't have a mark concept independent of
active regions. Emacs does. Realities don't go away by ignoring them.
> Not a problem. It is only when the region is *active* that typing
> replaces it. Emacs gives you the best of both worlds: the region can
> be active or inactive.
With transient-mark-mode, it will be active by default, even when you
just wanted to manipulate the mark.
> So we should remove t-m-mode as the default?
If all region marking operations beginners are accustomed to can create
an active region without reverting to transient-mark-mode (and Emacs got
there with mouse-selection and shift-selection), why not?
It makes things more consistent and avoids accidentally active regions
and the connected behavior.
>> Is there any evidence that delete-select-mode is instrinsically a good
>> thing, disregarding the fact that it has become common?
>
> Which do you do more often: (a) replace the text in the region or (b)
> set mark, move somewhere else, and insert text?
Depends on whether I have set the mark for the purpose of creating an
active region or not.
--
David Kastrup
- AW: delete-selection-mode, (continued)
- AW: delete-selection-mode, Berndl, Klaus, 2010/03/18
- RE: delete-selection-mode, Drew Adams, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode, Juri Linkov, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode, Miles Bader, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode, Juri Linkov, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/19
- Re: delete-selection-mode, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/18
- RE: delete-selection-mode (was: Put scroll-bar on right by defaulton UNIX.), Drew Adams, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: delete-selection-mode, Chad Brown, 2010/03/18
- RE: delete-selection-mode, Drew Adams, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/19
- RE: delete-selection-mode, Drew Adams, 2010/03/19
- Re: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/19
- RE: delete-selection-mode, Drew Adams, 2010/03/19
- Re: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/19
- Re: delete-selection-mode, Juri Linkov, 2010/03/19
- Re: delete-selection-mode (was: Put scroll-bar on right by defaulton UNIX.), Alan Mackenzie, 2010/03/18
- RE: delete-selection-mode (was: Put scroll-bar on right by defaultonUNIX.), Drew Adams, 2010/03/18