Subject: Re: bug#62892: proposal to extend mark-sexp to go forward and backward on command

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2023 18:11:57 +0300

> From: Eshel Yaron <[email-masked]>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>,  Stefan Monnier
>  <[email-masked]>,  [email-masked],  [email-masked],  Zachary
>  Kanfer <[email-masked]>,  [email-masked],  [email-masked]
> Date: Sun, 21 May 2023 17:56:54 +0300
> 
> I'm not sure if that's the preferred behavior, but I do think that
> consistently between the different marking commands is a good thing.

Why do you think there should be consistency here?  These are
different commands which target different use-cases.

Did you read the doc string of C-M-SPC?  It does something
extra-special when transient-mark-mode is enabled and the region is
active.