Re: Why using (push-mark) ?
Kyle Jones <kyle_jones(a)wonderworks.com> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org:
...
I'm not talking about hideously complicated semantics here. All
you need to know and remember to avoid mayhem is that M-< and M->
set the mark. This is too much to learn?
Yes. We apparently agree to disagree on issues like this. Signaling
errors when attempting to move beyond buffer boundaries is idiotic
behavior, but enshrined for all-time as "standard". I've been
overruled on this issue, but that doesn't stop from attacking other
windmills.
Setting the mark on these movement commands is different than all the
other movement commands which don't. It's inconsistent and stupid
(IMO).
I'd suggest coming up with new functions for `beginning-of-buffer' and
`end-of-buffer' which do not set the mark and allowing users to bind
them to M-> and M-< if they see fit.