[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: line adjustment at the end of a sentence

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: line adjustment at the end of a sentence
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 10:00:30 -0700

> >> A really good solution would not require turning it on/off.
> >> It's not about requiring.  Sometimes (and perhaps in some 
> >> places) you want to distinguish such chars, sometimes you do not.
> >> You want to be able to pick those times - i.e., on demand.
> "SPC vs SPC SPC" lets you eat your cake and have it too, because
> while it shows the difference, your brain will happily disregard it,
> so noone ever felt the need to provide a command to switch between
> "show the diff" and "hide the diff".

I have no problem with "SPC vs SPC SPC".  Never have had.

Apparently you are talking about something else than I.  My point was in reply
to your post regarding distinguishing no-break space from SPC.

*IF* you have SPC and no-break space chars in the same buffer, *THEN* what I
mentioned provides a good way to distinguish them when you want to and not
distinguish them when you do not want to.  A much better way than the one you
mentioned: what vanilla Emacs provides.

That is a different discussion from whether one should try to use no-break space
vs SPC as some kind of substitute for "SPC vs SPC SPC".  I did not and would not
propose that.

> So, yes, it's about "requiring".

You will never come up with a DWIM that guesses exactly just when and where Ms.
X or Mr. Y might want to distinguish SPC from no-break space visually.

So no, it is not about "requiring" users to toggle.  They will _want_ to be able
to turn showing such differences on/off easily.  Experience with other editors
and word processors that deal with such distinctions should make that clear.

> > Other editors and word processors do this kind of thing all 
> > the time, not only wrt hard-to-detect chars but wrt other things that you
> > sometimes want to see and sometimes do not: XML element boundaries and
> > attributes, editor text symbols/artifacts (e.g. pilcro),
> > conditionalized text, and so on.
> Yes, in the general case, there's probably no way to avoid the need to
> distinguish between "show markup" and "hide markup".

Good.  But don't look at it so negatively.  It is a _good_ thing for users to be
able to easily change the way they see things.

Providing them _only_ some programmer's guess as to what they need (DWIM) would
be restrictive.  Give them some common views, certainly, but let them also pick
and choose.

> But some markup (such as the SPC vs SPC SPC convention) is sufficiently 
> lightweight that you don't need to have those two states.

Irrelevant - see above.  IF you have both SPC and no-break present THEN...

reply via email to

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