Re: need option so line-move-to-column ignores fields, plus patch

[Slawomir Nowaczyk]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 18:04:55 -0400
Chong Yidong <address@hidden> wrote:

#> > #1 is clearly a bug.  C-n should be symmetrical with C-p.
#> 
#> I don't see where else the cursor can possibly go in #1. The logic of
#> line-move is like this: "Try to naively move the cursor vertically
#> down. If this moves us into a new field, go instead to the beginning
#> of the field (if going forward) or the end of the field (if going
#> backward)."

Is it? Just curious, what's the rationale for that? I know almost
nothing about fields, but to me, the logical behaviour would be
something like "... go instead to the *nearest* end of this field, i.e.
either to the beginning or to the end (both when going forward and when
going backward)"

This would at least make C-n and C-p symmetric.

-- 
 Best wishes,
   Slawomir Nowaczyk
     ( address@hidden )

To a man standing on the sun, everything looks like a conic section.