[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: draft for DEL key poll

From: chad
Subject: Re: draft for DEL key poll
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:04:30 -0700

On Sep 29, 2011, at 4:17 PM, Andrew W. Nosenko wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 20:56, chad <address@hidden> wrote:
On Sep 29, 2011, at 3:49 AM, Richard Stallman wrote:

Perhaps because you wanted to go to the other side of it with C-x C-x,
is the usual reason in my case. […]

[…] The C-x C-x case happens to me also, but rarely, and I find that
`C-x C-x C-x C-x' is comfortable enough in those cases.

How repeating C-x C-x helps you to deactivate region (and thus help it
to survive after DEL)?  In my case it still to be activated regardless
on the amount of "C-x C-x" repeatings.

My apologies; I was still using some experimental code that deactivated
the region on any C-x C-x but the first (as a side-effect to allowing a prefix
arg to toggle transient-mark-mode). Mea culpa.

About "rarely": do you understand that now, with current defaults, it
is only one way to safe using DEL in the macro -- explicitly mark the
intended to be deleted character by region and only then delete it?
Otherwise there my occur already activated region and you will delete
not the single character but the whole half of buffer.  Just by
occasion and the Murphy Law.

I assume that you mean keyboard macro here, yes?  This usage had not 
occurred to me, as I use elisp far more often than keyboard macros, and
don't use macros for destructive things like DEL.  Perhaps this is why the 
new code works on delete-char-forward and delete-char-backward but 
explicitly not delete-char?  (I admit that I was puzzled by that choice.)


reply via email to

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