GNU bug report logs - #71172
Info: Fixing Case: mention both ways

Previous Next

Full log

Message #12 received at control <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Dan Jacobson <jidanni <at> jidanni.org>
Cc: 71172 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#71172: Info: Fixing Case: mention both ways
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 15:45:13 +0300

tags 71172 notabug wontfix
close 71172
thanks

> From: Dan Jacobson <jidanni <at> jidanni.org>
> Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 09:55:53 +0800
> 
> On (info "(emacs) Fixing Case") be sure to mention the other way too!:
> < ‘M-- M-l’
> > ‘M-- M-l’ (or 'M-b M-l')
> < ‘M-- M-u’
> > ‘M-- M-u’ (or 'M-b M-u')
> < ‘M-- M-c’
> > ‘M-- M-c’ (or 'M-b M-c')

Why?  The point of M-- is that you do NOT need to go backwards, as
with other editors.  With the above logic, we'd also need to document
that

    C-M-r \b M-c
and
    C-M-r \< M-c
and
    C-M-r \Sw M-c

and gazillion other ways, are _also_ the way of fixing the case of
word before point.  To say nothing of the fact that "M-- M-c"
guarantees that point will remain where it was (so you can safely keep
typing afterwards), whereas all the other methods above do not.  E.g.,
try your M-b method when there's one or more SPC characters between
point and the end of the previous word.

The Emacs manual shows the recommended most convenient and correct
practices.  It doesn't (and should NOT) show all of the possible ways,
let alone complex and inconvenient onces.

So I don't think we should do what you suggest, and I'm therefore
closing this bug.

Previous Next

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