GNU bug report logs - #76596
30.1; dired-movement-style does not honor subdir operations

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Charles Choi <kickingvegas <at> gmail.com>, "76596 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <76596 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: bug#76596: 30.1; dired-movement-style does not honor subdir operations
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 09:54:19 +0200

>> > `bounded': skip blank lines and don't wrap `cycle'  : skip blank lines
>> > and wrap
>> > nil      : don't skip blank lines and don't wrap
>> >
>> > What's missing is "don't skip but wrap".
>> > And that's maybe the most useful possibility.
>> > (It's the default behavior for Dired+.)
>> 
>> I tried to add the value 'warp' that moves even to empty lines and wraps, but
>> it stops at the empty line at the end of the Dired buffer.
>
> Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying or what you did.
>
> If you mean that you try `n' and `p' (and the others I mentioned) after
> loading dired+.el then you should see cycling, not stopping (at all) at the
> empty line at the end of the Dired buffer. It wraps directly to the first
> file/dir listed in the buffer, under the main directory header line.

So the empty line at the end of the buffer is skipped, ok.

>> Why might anyone want this?
>
> Do you mean why would anyone want to stop at the blank line at the
> end, instead of wrapping? Dunno. I even wonder why anyone would want
> to not wrap - but some people apparently do. Maybe it helps with some
> keyboard macros?
>
> I also don't care about skipping blank lines, personally. 
>
> I do care about wrapping - for ALL of the navigation keys
> I mentioned. That's what's really needed, IMO. Not wrapping is an option,
> but IMO it's maybe not needed (I kept it as an option, to provide the
> vanilla Dired behavior). Likewise, as I say, I see no real need to skip
> blank lines. YMMV.

Do you need such wrapping in other modes too, not only in Dired?

>> > Please tell me why cycling doesn't logically apply to `C-M-n',
>> > `C-M-p', `>', and `<'.
>> 
>> `>' and `<' are already cycling,
>> while `C-M-n' and `C-M-p' aren't.
>
> Why shouldn't they?

They could if someone will implement this.

Previous Next

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