[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: Dired: Improve symmetry in mark/unmark commands bound to keys

From: Tino Calancha
Subject: RE: Dired: Improve symmetry in mark/unmark commands bound to keys
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 18:06:22 +0900 (JST)
User-agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)

On Sat, 24 Sep 2016, Drew Adams wrote:

The prefix was obviously never
intented to be used with this command.  The only intented use of the
second argument was the its caller, dired-flag-extension.  That is easy
to prove, because before commit 736b582 it wasn't even documented in the
doc string.

Yes.  More importantly, we can do what we think is best.

What do we really need?

1. We need for `dired-flag-extension' to work.  With the current
  implementation that means calling `dired-mark-extension' with
  a `D' mark.

2. We need a command for changing the mark character that is used
  for the currently marked files.  We have that: `* c'

3. We need a command to mark files that have a given extension.
  We have that: `* .' (`dired-mark-extension').

4. We need a command to unmark files that have a given extension.
  We do NOT have this.

Unfortunately not.  We could if my patch in bug#24518
would being applied.
5. Do we need a command that marks files that have a given
  extension and prompts you for which mark character to use?
  This is currently provided by `* .' with a prefix arg.

No at all.

My patch at bug#24518 is not a fast crazy idea.  It is the result
of years of using Dired and reading its souce: using its amazing marking
capabilities heavily.  That patch would deserve much more attention
that just being discarded after a few hours of e-mail communication.

Why so rush to close that bug report?
*) It could be a misunderstanding:
   i said that we could fix it in the way it has being done, but that
   i don't wanted to be the author of the commit.  That could be understood
   as if i was OK with that fix.  Let me clarify that words.  It was a way
   to say that i was against that solution.  IMO, after applying that patch
   Dired became less consistent, less nice ... nobody really loving Dired
   would ever applied such patch.  Dired is the my #1 reason to use Emacs:
   commit 5ee56c46 really broke my hearth.
   In bug#24518 there 3 participants, and 2 were againts the applied fix.
   Now, in this thread the situation turns out to be: 3-1.

*) If it wasn't a misunderstanding, then i am very disappointed.  Why not to
   wait until more people give their feedback?  That is not the way we handle
   the bug reports, at least not what they have taught me.  There are many
   Dired enthusiastic people.  I have no doubt if we kept open the bug
   report we would get more input and find a consensus.  That is why i open
   the this thread.  I want to let others the opportunity to give their
   opinion, and make all together a better Dired, that is, a better Emacs.

reply via email to

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