[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Sun, 1 Aug 2010 22:34:40 -0700
> > > an error seems like common sense and what users would expect.
> > That's highly subjective IMHO.
> > Do you oppose to the following (minimal) version?
> Nope. (I already said so.)
Oops, yes, I do oppose it, because it is incorrect.
What I said earlier was:
"I have no real objection to a clear statement of the error handling."
But it is incorrect that these raise an error if the region is inactive - they
Visit some file.
C-SPC, then move point somewhere.
C-g to deactivate the region.
M-: (region-beginning) -> returns the value of `(mark)'.
This is with the default value of `mark-even-if-inactive' and the default of
transient-mark-mode turned on.
If you want to describe the error treatment then you need to do so completely
and correctly. As before, I recommend against describing error handling in this
case, but I do not oppose it if done right.