[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'.

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 22:55:01 +0200

> From: John Wiegley <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden
> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:28:05 -0800
> > You are welcome to re-reading the past discussions about
> > electric-indent-mode.  Good luck keeping your sanity while at that ;-)
> Looking at electric-indent-mode, the defaults are actually quite sane: The
> only thing that engages electric indentation by default is insertion of a
> newline. The user can also manually engage it using C-j.

It looks sane, yes, but it has some surprising consequences.  E.g.,


> One way to fix this is to set a default for `electric-indent-functions' that
> pays attention to this particular scenario, and suppresses electric indent in
> that case. This leaves it open to users to customize away the suppression.
> This keeps the electric default, and C-o-at-0 users are not surprised. Does
> that sound reasonable?

To me, nothing about electric-indent-mode is reasonable.  I don't mind
swapping C-m and C-j, if that's what will keep me sane.  If
electric-indent-mode did just that, perhaps I'd be fine with it.

reply via email to

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