GNU bug report logs - #64185
proposal for new function: copy-line

Previous Next

Full log

Message #77 received at 64185 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 64185 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, me <at> eshelyaron.com, zkanfer <at> gmail.com,
 juri <at> linkov.net
Subject: Re: bug#64185: proposal for new function: copy-line
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 14:07:15 +0300

> From: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 12:50:52 +0200
> Cc: juri <at> linkov.net,
>  64185 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
>  me <at> eshelyaron.com,
>  zkanfer <at> gmail.com
> 
> 23 juni 2023 kl. 12.28 skrev Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>:
> 
> > This is a new feature in Emacs 29, so adding customization
> > opportunities to it that allow fine control of its behavior is fine at
> > this stage.  Of course, if the proposal is controversial, we shouldn't
> > rush.  My impression till now was that it wasn't controversial.  If
> > the only issue is better documentation and/or whether the value should
> > be a number or a symbol, then I see no problem with installing this on
> > the release branch.
> 
> The new setting would be quite incomplete if it doesn't apply to the
> more general and useful duplicate-dwim as well.

It is? why?  The difference between these two commands is that
duplicate-dwim is sensitive to the active region, but in that case how
is it useful to talk about lines, given that region could be a part of
a line or several lines plus a part of the first and the last one?

So it sounds to me that we could easily leave duplicate-dwim as it is
now, i.e. disregard this option in that command.

Why isn't that "good enough" for Emacs 29?

Previous Next

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