Re: Transient Mark Mode on by default

[Chong Yidong]

Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden> writes:

> I feel I must protest here as strongly as I can.  Unless I've missed
> something (not unlikely, given the volume and heat of recent posts on the
> topic) this change has NOT been discussed properly, and a consensus has
> NOT been reached on it.
>
> The recent discussions have been almost entirely about the mechanisms and
> the practicalities of Transient Mark Mode, about key sequences, about
> which of several variations is better.  NOT about whether it is a Good
> Thing as a default.  I feel that this change, making Transient Mark Mode
> on by default, is being slipped through almost surreptitiously, at a time
> when we're too weary (from the recent discussions) to object.

I'm sorry you think that; it was not the intention to "sneak in" the
feature.  I've read the entire discussion on emacs-devel, as well as
some older discussions in help-gnu-emacs and elsewhere.  People on
both sides have already put forth good arguments about why tmm
should/should not be made default, and my impression was that the
discussion has run its course.  So, after some more discussion with
Stefan, I went ahead and changed the default.  If you want a fresh
discussion, let's have that.

For the moment, let's leave tmm turned on in the trunk, at least for a
couple of weeks.  If nothing else, this change might provoke more
people to join the discussion, who may have good points to make.

> I say, yet again, Transient Mark Mode is NOT a good default.  It violates
> the philosophy of Emacs in several ways:
> (i) It's very complicated, certainly when compared with the elegant
>   simplicity of the classical Emacs mark.
> (ii) It introduces "modal" behaviour (as in vi's insert/command mode)
>   into Emacs - many commands behave differently when the mark is active.
> (iii) It's obtrusive; it's "in your face"; it will provoke the angry
>   reaction "how do I get rid of this address@hidden thing!!!!!".

I am not sure what you mean by (i); could you elaborate?  My
impression is that tmm is simpler than the invisible mark.  Because
the region is highlighted, the user doesn't have to memorize where the
mark is at each point of time.

(ii) Modal behavior has been in default Emacs for a long time now,
e.g. C-s.  I've read a few posts in which people say they find tmm
works pretty seamlessly, which is the important thing.  Tthis is my
experience also.

(iii) This has been answered in a couple of ways.  First, it's easy to
turn tmm off; you don't even have to write Lisp code, you can simply
use the menu bar, under Options->Active Region Highlighting.  Second,
the old invisible mark behavior is available with C-SPC C-SPC
(previously, this was the main sticking point, since the mark is also
useful for buffer navigation.)

> There have been few people indeed who have posted "I think transient mark
> mode, as it now is, should be made the default in Emacs".  Dan has,
> Stefan has.  Anybody else?  I have opined strongly that Transient Mark
> Mode should NOT become default, and I think David Kastrup may have done
> the same.  Of "ousiders", Evans Winner says TMM should be off by default,
> Jason Earl says it should be on.

I don't think head-counting is indicative, since what matters is the
points people make.  But, as far as I can tell, Dan, Stefan, myself,
Drew, and Lennart have spoken in favor of making tmm the default;
Mathias says he finds tmm OK; and yourself, Sascha, and David Kastrup
are against making it the default.  Those who haven't expressed a
strong opinion either way include Eli, Juanma, Miles (who said he
thinks tmm works pretty well) and Kim (who wrote CUA mode and
presumably uses it).  Please correct me if I misrepresented anyone.