Re: C-n and C-a

[Stefan Monnier]

> The new definitions of C-n and C-p seem to work reasonably
> conveniently with the very long lines that non-Emacs-users often
> write.  However, it is very counterintuitive that C-a and C-e have not
> been changed in the same way.  They keep surprising me, and I have to
> work hard to remember not to use them to do the natural thing.

> I think they too should be changed to operate on screen lines;
> that's a necessary part of the change that was already made.

How about C-k?

I personally like the new behavior, even though it is
indeed inconsistent.  But if people want to change the default,
that's fine.

Maybe we should have a 3-value setting: fully visual-line based
operation, fully logical-line based operation, or half-assed
(visual-lines for C-n and C-p but logical-lines for the rest).

I'll let people fight over which default should be chosen.


        Stefan