[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: change cursor type when idle

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: change cursor type when idle
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 07:19:13 -0800

>  - There's too much code, the compatibility code should go

It already went. I sent Thi the update (off list), as he requested.

>  - Too many knobs to turn

Be specific. "Too many" begs explanation.

>  - What's the point of changing the cursor when emacs is idle?
>  - What's the point in changing the cursor in a read-only buffer?
>  - Someone that uses input methods should comment if changing 
>    the cursor for when doing that is useful.
>  - Changing the cursor in overwrite mode seems like a good idea, other
>    editors do it too.

Juanma replied to these questions. Each can be useful in come contexts. None
should be mandated for users, of course.

I'd add that change when Emacs is idle can be useful to help you see where
the cursor is. Idle Emacs can mean your attention is not currently at point.
(This change is only from bar cursor to box.)

>  - IMO we should only consider adding this if we are willing 
>    to turn it on by default.

Which? All?

I have the options on, myself, so I have nothing against having them on by
default. Users of my library oneonone.el also have similar options on by

As mentioned in the Commentary, some of this is based on ideas from others
(Juri, in particular), and there are some other libraries that do something
similar. That is an indication that it can be useful. And Juanma mentions
that CUA has something similar, which also indicates that this can be

Wrt overlap with CUA:

I don't know when this was added to CUA; I wasn't aware of that when I wrote
this, which was in November 2005.

If a merge or refactoring with CUA code is in order, then I would think it
would be for CUA to use the code from a separate library, as opposed to
making users who want only the cursor changes use cua-mode.

>    If it's not considered useful enough to be on by
>    default, then it seems like fluff that it's not worth documenting.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]