RE: Shift selection using interactive spec

[Drew Adams]

> If we're willing to ignore backward compatibility, I think
> a good way to clean this up as follows:
>  - make transient-mark-mode a boolean again
>  - give mark-active a couple new possible values:
>     nil == same as now
>     t == mark active but no highlighting
>     `highlight' == mark active, highlight the region
>     `highlight-until-deactivated' == temporary TMM (like `lambda')
>  - change every relevant place in the code (including a couple of
>    spots in xdisp.c).  For example,
>      (and transient-mark-mode mark-active)
>    would become
>      (memq mark-active '(highlight highlight-until-deactivated))

I have not been following all of the stuff in this thread - mea culpa.

What is the reason for breaking backward compatibility and breaking
3rd-party code (e.g. the need to change (and transient-mark-mode
mark-active) -> (memq mark-active '(highlight highlight-until-deactivated))?

Is all of this only about satisfying those who want to let newbies use Shift
to select text in a way that doesn't perturb their habit, or is something
else behind this? If the former, it doesn't seem to me worth requiring code
changes all over the place. It sounds like much ado about nothing (or
little).

If we gain nothing substantial by this, then count me among those who think
it ain't broke now (and if it ain't broke, don't fix it). We have CUA
selection mode, delete selection mode, PC selection mode, and transient mark
mode. I've got nothing against adding yet another selection mode or
combining some existing selection modes, but not at a cost of forcing
changes to existing 3rd-party code.

Please summarize the perceived need and, especially, the costs & benefits of
the proposed changes. Thx.