Re: please make line-move-visual nil

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   You can argue that it would not be "magic" or unpredictable, but
   indeed based on a mode or mode-deriviation.  But could you predict
   (just as "stupid" user, not as mode's author), what deriviation
   tree has Occur mode, for example?  Or Shell Output?  (Ok, I know
   that Shell Command Output buffer has Fundamental mode, and what?)

Maybe you are right, all I would like to see is a compromise that the
majority of people will agree to.

The fact that Yidong, and Monnier simply disregard any discussion on
the topic is frustrating, specially since people have voiced strong
arguments for why the new behaviour is broken.  Hand waving arguments
are insulting to everyone on this list.

This must be resolved before the release.

   But I understand your point.  Moreover, some time ago I also was
   very frustrated, because convinient way for "phisical" line
   navigation is no less.  And solution is very simple: just give best
   from both worlds: above in this thread alredy mentioned that
   AquaEmacs has different bindings for C-n/C-p vs. down/up.  I also
   just bound "phisical" line movements to the M-down and M-up in
   addition to the "visual" on down and up, and have now conventient
   and similar bindings to the both movement modes.

Maybe that is an idea, bind the line-move-visual behaviour to M-n/M-p
or just the arrow keys (maybe someone suggested this already).  What
do people think?