GNU bug report logs - #52384
26.3; dired buffer navigation tweak

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Arthur Miller <arthur.miller <at> live.com>
Cc: "52384 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <52384 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>, Michael Perry <amperry <at> provide.net>
Subject: bug#52384: [External] : bug#52384: 26.3; dired buffer navigation tweak
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2021 16:41:22 +0000

> > Giving such behavior to vanilla Emacs is trivial.
> > And I likely did propose it long ago, and there's
> > a chance I even provided code for it.  In any case,
> > the code isn't hard.
>
> I don't think it is hard to code; it was just you already made it in
> dired+, so it's your code, your thing, your patch :).

As I said, I likely already did that, long ago.
Patches I submit are generally ignored.

If you think that the slight changes I made in
Dired+ for this are worth proposing in a patch,
feel free to do so.  But there's nothing special
about that particular coding.

> >> It would be handy if 'p' and 'n' and '<' and '>' would behave
> >> similarly.
> >
> > `p' and `n' do behave similarly, based on the same
> > user option.  And yes, I generally do provide
> > wraparound navigation etc. in my code.  It usually
> > makes sense to do so.
>
> Yes, It would be nice if Emacs had consistent "wrap around" for more
> things, as an option of course; like in windmove.el.

Yes, optionally.  Sometimes, as in Dired for
different kinds of navigation, a single option
could reasonably control wraparound for different
commands.  Other times, it's more appropriate to
have separate options.

Previous Next

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