[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AW: delete-selection-mode
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: AW: delete-selection-mode |
Date: |
Thu, 18 Mar 2010 09:08:24 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.92 (gnu/linux) |
"Drew Adams" <address@hidden> writes:
>> From: David Kastrup
>
> [rabid foaming at the mouth elided]
>
>> > Let's hear instead from those who use transient-mark-mode *without*
>> > delete-selection-mode (intentionally, not just by default or from
>> > ignorance of delsel). Let us know why t-m-mode without
>> > d-s-mode is the right choice as a default for Emacs.
>> > That could be an interesting discussion.
>>
>> Since I already gave examples and explained
>
> It's interesting to see you respond to that call, indicating that you
> now use transient-mark-mode, albeit without
> delete-selection-mode. Good to hear there has been some progress. What
> made you switch to t-m-mode?
There was no switch involved. I stayed with the default, IIRC just like
Richard. Using non-standard Emacsen makes it much harder to help other
people ("it doesn't do that here") and participate usefully in
discussions.
I don't believe in a culture that gives beginners a dumbed-down tool
while leaving the productivity to the people experienced enough to
recustomize Emacs to more useful behavior.
I also stayed with syntax highlighting once it became the default, and
reported (and experienced) a number of regressions (if you can call
intolerable performance for a feature not even present before a
regression) that were impacting Emacs' usability for large files.
> But you did *not* give any examples or explanation of why t-m-mode
> without d-s-mode is a better default than d-s-mode. Not in any mails I
> received from you, you didn't. Please point to one such example and
> explanation.
>
> Did you mean this, perhaps:
>
>> You can set the mark, move somewhere else, type stuff there, and
>> return using C-x C-x, again typing stuff there, without destroying
>> anything you have written.
If that was not in any mails you received from me, where did you pick it
from?
> Again, that's just a rehash of an argument why we should *not* even
> have t-m-mode as the default.
Huh? That works fine with transient-mark-mode.
> [more frothing and foaming trimmed]
--
David Kastrup
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, (continued)
- RE: AW: delete-selection-mode, Drew Adams, 2010/03/18
- Message not available
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/18
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, Chong Yidong, 2010/03/18
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/18
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/18
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/18
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/18
- RE: AW: delete-selection-mode, Drew Adams, 2010/03/17
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, Richard Stallman, 2010/03/18
- RE: AW: delete-selection-mode, Drew Adams, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode, Alan Mackenzie, 2010/03/18
- Re: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/18
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, Juri Linkov, 2010/03/17
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/18
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, Harald Hanche-Olsen, 2010/03/17
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, David Kastrup, 2010/03/18
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, Chad Brown, 2010/03/18
- Re: AW: delete-selection-mode, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/18