4:31 p.m.
This is a major change, so I thought it would be better to throw this
out to the list, rather than just submitting a patch.
For the last umpteen years, I have had the following two lines in .emacs:
(global-set-key [(return)] 'newline-and-indent)
(global-set-key [(linefeed)] 'newline)
I cannot understand anyone who does not also have this. It does the
right thing everywhere. In source buffers, it indents properly. In
non-source buffers, it indents properly (i.e. not at all).
Of all the people that I have shown this to, only one has not changed
his bindings to match. There seems to me no reason why we should not
make this the default.
I imagine that somewhere in the dark past, there was no function
`newline-and-indent', and that is why we still don't bind it to
<return> by default.
I propose that we make a change for the better. We should change one
of the most used keys on the keyboard to a smarter and more functional
binding.
Does anyone disagree?
--
Colin
4:54 p.m.
On 01 Apr 1999 10:31:25 EST, you said:
(global-set-key [(return)] 'newline-and-indent)
(global-set-key [(linefeed)] 'newline)
...
Does anyone disagree?
"But how do I undent? I've always hit return and then indented to
where I want to - now it's Going Too Damned Far sometimes".
There *are* people who hit return, and then hit 2/4/6/8/etc spaces.
Oh.. you can't say "linefeed" in your explanation either - my keyboard
doesn't HAVE a 'linefeed' key.
(Yes, I'm being pendantic. Yes, I think the change is The Way It Should Be.
No, I don't think we should make it unless we address the re-education issue).
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
6:16 p.m.
Colin Rafferty writes:
This is a major change, so I thought it would be better to throw
this
out to the list, rather than just submitting a patch.
For the last umpteen years, I have had the following two lines in .emacs:
(global-set-key [(return)] 'newline-and-indent)
(global-set-key [(linefeed)] 'newline)
I cannot understand anyone who does not also have this. It does the
right thing everywhere. In source buffers, it indents properly. In
non-source buffers, it indents properly (i.e. not at all).
Of all the people that I have shown this to, only one has not changed
his bindings to match. There seems to me no reason why we should not
make this the default.
I imagine that somewhere in the dark past, there was no function
`newline-and-indent', and that is why we still don't bind it to
<return> by default.
I propose that we make a change for the better. We should change one
of the most used keys on the keyboard to a smarter and more functional
binding.
Does anyone disagree?
I don't consider it adviseable. The issue is the potential for
surprise and frustration. If a new user edits some file with an
extension which just happens to throw the buffer into some foreign
mode that he doesn't understand, and things work differently in that
mode, and he doesn't know how to "make it act sane", it can be
extremely frustrating.
Popularizing the mod you suggest by putting some suggestive comment in
sample.emacs, seems more well advised to me.
Personally, I just hit C-j whenever I'm in a programming mode. One
reason this makes sense is because of commenting. Some programming
modes have some wierd "comment gravity" behavior (sorry I don't know
the proper name for this curiously adictive bizardom), where a comment
will be auto indented, but to different places depending on where you
were when you started it. If you hit C-j, and you drop to the
reindent column, and start typing a comment it may stay there, move
right, move left, etc. If you hit return, to go to leftmost column of
next row, and start typing a comment, it might stay there, which might
be a different location than in the preceding scenario. If that's
what you want, having "return" not go there, is maddening.
IMO, it is easier for the eclectic to learn to customize, than for the
novice to learn to uncustomize. Spoken as one who is better than
novice and poorer than eclectic.
--
Geoffrey Furnish Actel Corporation furnish(a)actel.com
Senior Staff Engineer 955 East Arques Ave voice: 408-522-7528
Placement & Routing Sunnyvale, CA 94086-4533 fax: 408-328-2303
6:50 p.m.
Valdis.Kletnieks(a)vt.edu writes:
On 01 Apr 1999 18:28:32 +0200, you said:
> Not today, there aren't. But maybe we should rebind `C-x', `C-c', and
> `C-v' to `cut', `copy', and `paste' at the same time?
Gaak. Is there a smiley missing here? ;)
Nah, I included the word `today'.
But even on other days, I'd prefer the default configuration of Emacs
to be as CUA compliant as possible, and then some. Obviously, this
would require a `tranditional-mode'. And even with that, it is a lost
cause. So I shut up the rest of the year.
Having thus lost all credibility, I can comment on CR's proposal,
which apparently isn't specific for this day. I believe it is a bad
idea, even though it is what 99% of the users will want. I think
programs should be stupid, until the user explicitly tells them to be
smart. In a text editor, something as basic as the carriage return
key should only insert a new line, not try to be smart. Not by
default. Once the user has discovered what the `C' or `TeX' in the
second line from the bottom means, he can start change the defaults.
Maybe it should be easier to enable `smart return' though.
12:24 a.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org
[mailto:owner-xemacs-beta＠xemacs.org]On Behalf Of Geoffrey Furnish
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 1999 9:17 AM
To: Colin Rafferty
Cc: XEmacs Beta List
Subject: RE: change \C-m binding to newline-and-indent
Colin Rafferty writes:
> This is a major change, so I thought it would be better to throw this
> out to the list, rather than just submitting a patch.
>
> For the last umpteen years, I have had the following two lines
in .emacs:
>
> (global-set-key [(return)] 'newline-and-indent)
> (global-set-key [(linefeed)] 'newline)
>
> I cannot understand anyone who does not also have this. It does the
> right thing everywhere. In source buffers, it indents properly. In
> non-source buffers, it indents properly (i.e. not at all).
>
> Of all the people that I have shown this to, only one has not changed
> his bindings to match. There seems to me no reason why we should not
> make this the default.
>
> I imagine that somewhere in the dark past, there was no function
> `newline-and-indent', and that is why we still don't bind it to
> <return> by default.
>
> I propose that we make a change for the better. We should change one
> of the most used keys on the keyboard to a smarter and more functional
> binding.
>
> Does anyone disagree?
I don't consider it adviseable. The issue is the potential for
surprise and frustration. If a new user edits some file with an
extension which just happens to throw the buffer into some foreign
mode that he doesn't understand, and things work differently in that
mode, and he doesn't know how to "make it act sane", it can be
extremely frustrating.
Popularizing the mod you suggest by putting some suggestive comment in
sample.emacs, seems more well advised to me.
Personally, I just hit C-j whenever I'm in a programming mode. One
reason this makes sense is because of commenting. Some programming
modes have some wierd "comment gravity" behavior (sorry I don't know
the proper name for this curiously adictive bizardom), where a comment
will be auto indented, but to different places depending on where you
were when you started it. If you hit C-j, and you drop to the
reindent column, and start typing a comment it may stay there, move
right, move left, etc. If you hit return, to go to leftmost column of
next row, and start typing a comment, it might stay there, which might
be a different location than in the preceding scenario. If that's
what you want, having "return" not go there, is maddening.
IMO, it is easier for the eclectic to learn to customize, than for the
novice to learn to uncustomize. Spoken as one who is better than
novice and poorer than eclectic.
--
Geoffrey Furnish Actel Corporation furnish(a)actel.com
Senior Staff Engineer 955 East Arques Ave voice:
408-522-7528
Placement & Routing Sunnyvale, CA 94086-4533 fax:
408-328-2303
I totally agree with Geoffrey. Do not change this because it is not broken.
Brian (also somewhere between novice and eclectic)
9166
days inactive
9166
days old
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Brian Bailey -
Colin Rafferty -
Geoffrey Furnish -
Olivier Galibert -
Per Abrahamsen -
Valdis Kl=?iso8859-4?Q?=BA?=tnieks