GNU bug report logs - #4981
C-l during query-replace

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Juri Linkov'" <juri <at> jurta.org>, <4981 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
        "'Stefan Monnier'" <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: "'Dan Nicolaescu'" <dann <at> ics.uci.edu>
Subject: bug#4981: C-l during query-replace
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:24:33 -0800

> >> Thanks for fixing this.  Are you sure that the new 
> >> `recenter-positions' is needed?  Given that there
> >> are 3 choices, it's easy to cycle through
> >> them, so adding yet another defcustom that would be use by 
> >> a very small number of users does not seem justified (IMHO).
> >
> > I agree that it's overengineering.
> 
> I think what is overengineering is adding recenter-top-bottom
> in the first place.  It imposes the arbitrary fixed cycling order
> on users with no hope to customize such fundamental feature as
> recentering.  `recenter-positions' mitigates this problem in the true
> Emacs way as the *customizable* editor.

As the one originally responsible for `recenter-top-bottom', let me chime in.
;-)

1. Just as with `recenter', a `recenter-top-bottom' user can always provide a
prefix arg to get the exact behavior wanted. It imposes nothing more than
`recenter' imposed.

2. The fact that we seem to be extending the use of this to other areas
indicates that it has proved to be an improvement wrt `recenter'.

3. I have no objection to user's being able, via an option, to add more cycle
points and define their positions. That's not overengineering, IMO. I think the
default should be what `recenter-top-bottom' defined: 3 cycle points, top,
center, bottom.

 - Drew

Previous Next

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