GNU bug report logs - #24902
25.1; C-x = for Unicode

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: rms <at> gnu.org, mattiase <at> acm.org, rpluim <at> gmail.com, Ulrich.Windl <at> rz.uni-regensburg.de, juri <at> linkov.net, 24902 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#24902: Antw: [EXT] Re: bug#24902: 25.1; C-x = for Unicode
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2022 18:46:55 +0200

> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
> Cc: rms <at> gnu.org,  mattiase <at> acm.org,  rpluim <at> gmail.com,
>   Ulrich.Windl <at> rz.uni-regensburg.de,  juri <at> linkov.net,
>   24902 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2022 16:47:49 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > For example, when there's some problem with cursor position, and I
> > want to know where point _really_ is.  Also, when there are many
> > similar characters in the buffer, and seeing both the character itself
> > and its position goes a long way towards disambiguating stuff.
> >
> > The "part of display ..." and the EOB indication are also occasionally
> > very useful.
> 
> Thanks; I see.  This sounds very useful especially when debugging the
> Emacs display, but perhaps isn't what most users would feel is vital?
> (But I don't know one way or the other.)

Those are my frequent use cases.

> If we split this up into two commands, but added a user option to get
> the combined display back on `C-x =', would that be acceptable for you?
> (I'm not saying that I actually want that, but just exploring what our
> options are here; I don't have any strong feelings on the matter.)

Why not put the 2 new commands on 2 other keys, and leave "C-x ="
alone?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.