[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#60213: [PATCH] Copy Info-goto-node-web URL as kill with prefix argum
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
bug#60213: [PATCH] Copy Info-goto-node-web URL as kill with prefix argument |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Dec 2022 17:24:50 +0000 |
> The attached patch make `Info-goto-node-web' copy the URL as kill with a
> prefix argument, instead of opening it with `browse-url'. I've seen
> this feature requested a couple of times now by various people.
Couple of times, various people? Any besides
the one time and one person (Marcin)? Based
on what, a month of experience with the new
command? What's the inconvenience that the
enhancement request would overcome - just
killing/copying the URL in the minibuffer?
What about using the prefix arg to open the
URL in a separate browser window? After all,
that's the behavior of `Info-goto-node-web'
(the original).
[If not then `info+.el' will keep needing to
define the command (now REdefine), even after
Emacs 29. OK, I'm used to it...]
That's the behavior users have enjoyed for
almost a decade. During those years, I never
once received a request to add copying the
URL to the kill-ring. Not that that's a
horrible idea - but how useful is it compared
to the longstanding prefix-arg behavior?
Consider also: how hard is it to get the URL
to the kill-ring? Just copy (or kill & yank)
it in the minibuffer to begin with. If you
forget to do that, then when you use the same
minibuffer history again, `M-p C-k' retrieves
the URL and adds it to the kill ring. Not a
big deal.
And compare, e.g., `find-file'. There we
have a separate command for `other-window'.
(Not a browser window, but ~same idea.) We
don't have anything special for saving the
file location (abs-name) to the kill-ring.
We haven't needed that for 40 years... Has
anyone even requested it?
For `find-file' and such, it's apparently
enough that you can get to the file name
with `M-p' - we've felt no need to add it
to the kill-ring.
Or perhaps combine both optional behaviors,
as I suggested in my msg in thread #60190?
If you insist on doing what you're doing
then I'd suggest you at least add another
command for opening the URL in a separate
browser window. And perhaps yet another
to open it in a separate browser tab.