[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy |
Date: |
Sun, 10 May 2020 19:33:39 -0700 (PDT) |
> > > Because t toggles marks, and C is not a mark, it's a flag.
> >
> > This is not true. Let's please not go there.
>
> But if you think so (and I somewhat agree), isn't then the first
> sentence in the docstring that Eli didn't touch:
>
> "Toggle marks: marked files become unmarked, and vice versa."
>
> even more confusing? I guess Eli wanted to avoid a sentence like "and
> files marked with marks other than the * mark don't count as marked."
I already agreed that the doc string could be clearer.
I suggested this:
Toggle `*' marks: unmark marked files, and vice versa.
But perhaps this would be even better (since "those"
refers to "`*' marks"):
Toggle `*' marks: unmark those marked, and vice versa.
Or (72 chars):
Toggle `*' marks: unmark files marked `*'; mark unmarked files with `*'.
IOW, explicitly say that toggling applies to `*' marks.
> But the inconsistency goes much further, we say that commands operate
> on the "marked" files, but we mean only the *-marked files.
See above. (Are you talking about `t' here still?
Why do you say "commands" (plural)?)
> So I guess the terminology is "marked with" applies to any mark and
> "marked" only to files marked with *, and "unmarked" means "doesn't
> have any mark". Oh dear, it's like learning English modal verbs.
I don't understand. Perhaps I'm missing something.
No, there's nothing special about "marked with".
`t' replaces all `*' marks with a space - unmarks them.
`t' replaces all unmarked (space) with a `*' mark.
> I think we can be more specific in the docstring, and I also don't like
> to introduce the second term "flag" here since it is somewhat linked to
> deletion indeed, and it's meaning is as fluent as "mark" - that doesn't
> help.
It's _entirely_ linked to deletion, in Dired. Or it
was, until Eli's change.
> Ok, would something like this be a compromise?
>
> - Toggle marks: marked files become unmarked, and vice versa.
> - Files marked with other flags (such as `D') are not affected.
>
> + Toggle marks: marked files become unmarked, and vice versa.
> + This means that files marked with `*' are unmarked and files that
> don't
> + have any mark are marked with `*'. Files marked with any
> + characters other than `*' are uneffected.
unaffected, not uneffected.
That text is fine by me, even if a bit verbose
("This means").
I'd still propose mentioning `*' in the first
sentence (the main one) - it's about `*' marks
(only). But your text is clear enough, to me.
> (the term "marker character" is already used in the manual.)
FWIW I don't understand why you added that part
in parens to your message.
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, (continued)
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Richard Stallman, 2020/05/11
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Jean Louis, 2020/05/10
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/10
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Drew Adams, 2020/05/10
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Jean Louis, 2020/05/10
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Michael Heerdegen, 2020/05/10
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy,
Drew Adams <=
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Michael Heerdegen, 2020/05/11
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Drew Adams, 2020/05/11
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Arthur Miller, 2020/05/11
- bug#41097: 28.0.50; (dired-toggle-marks) not working after copy, Drew Adams, 2020/05/11