Re: compilation-highlight-duration

[Juri Linkov]

address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:
> Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>> Does anyone actually want the highlighting after using next-error?
>> If we don't need that feature, I'd say just move the highlighting
>> code into next-error-no-select.
>
> FWIW, I want it!  Firstly, it is consistent behaviour.
>
> Secondly, I like the highlighting that instantly shows me the failing line,
> instead of having to look for the line containing the cursor -- blinking
> the whole line is faster (for me) that having to look for the cursor.

Adding `next-error-highlight' and `next-error-highlight-no-select'
reveals one problem.  When these user options are defined by
`defcustom' it requires to specify a group name under which they
should be placed.  The current logic by using the `next-error-' prefix
suggests the group name `next-error'.  But it would be misleading for modes
other than compile.  For grep, diff and occur this name makes no sense.

There are aliases `goto-next-locus' and `next-match' for `next-error'
which suggest a better name.  Perhaps something like `follow-locus'
would be better?

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/