Re: follow-link in grep buffer

[David Kastrup]

"Drew Adams" <address@hidden> writes:

>     > I use mouse-1 to set point currently, as usual (no
>     > double-clicking). If we changed mouse-1 to follow links, then I
>     > would double-click to set point - or I would forego
>     > mouse-1-follows-links. "Simple editing" would not be affected
>     > detrimentally by what I or Kim described, and such buffers are not
>     > for non-simple editing.
>
>     Look, you are arguing for an interface you are not even using
>     yourself.
>
> I argued for full-line mouseover highlighting in buffers like
> grep. I've been using it for decades. Try it; you'll like it.

I don't.  I don't need to particularly try it since it is the current
default.

To make this visually acceptable, we will need two different
highlighting faces: a decent one on the whole line (such as
underlining), and possibly a more striking one on selected "hot
spots", like just the filename in a grep or dired buffer.  The whole
actionable area can always be invoked by mouse-2, and I think we have
agreement that having selected hot spots (like Customize buttons)
react to mouse-1 is a good idea.

We have not much talked about larger actionable areas not specifically
marked as buttons by the application programmer: the initial plans
were more or less based on making them behave equal to hot spots or
buttons, which has the disadvantage that they often cover areas where
one would want to set point with mouse-1. There is some agreement that
offering more than mouse-2 on them for triggering the action would be
a good idea.  My proposal was to use a double mouse-1 click here, so
that a single click can still set point.  Opinions here vary wildly,
with quite a few proposals trying to make a single mouse-1 click also
work for triggering an action, but with a mixture of special rules
like "how long the click?" "click into non-selected window?" "click
into non-focused frame" to pick stuff apart.  Rules that partly
violate some policies for click event set forth in the Elisp manuals,
and rules that partly can't be cast into event types described by our
hypertext help system.

It is clear that tastes for one's own personal use vary wildly, and it
certainly would be nice if many tastes could be accommodated with
customization possibilities.

> Bad generalization. A better generalization is "Whenever David
> discusses something, he screams like Howard Dean in Iowa." But
> neither generalization is very good.

Whatever.  Enough people have pointed out by now that they see little
merit or sense or consistency or logic in my proposals.  So I'll just
stop screaming and let others decide.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum