Re: next-error-last-buffer

[Kim F. Storm]

Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden> writes:

> On Fri, 28 May 2004, address@hidden wrote:
> 
> >     next-error-no-visit: M-n
> > 
> > Let's call that forward-error-message.
> > 
> >     previous-error-no-visit: M-p
> > 
> > Let's call that backward-error-message.
> 
> Wouldn't that be confusing?  We already have the prefixing adjectives
> "next" and "previous" established, now users have to also remember
> "forward" and "backward."  I know Emacs already does it in many
> places, but I think we should try to limit the number of adjectives
> in this case.

I also find the forward-/backward- prefixes inappropriate in this
case; to me they indicate movement in the current buffer or some
other "closed context".

In contrast, the next-/previous- doesn't necessarily indicate any
specific sequence of the visited items (navigating in a list of
places to visit).

> 
> >     next-error-file-no-select: M-}, M-N
> > 
> > I'd rather avoid defining M-N and M-P as different from M-n and M-p.
> > We don't need to do it; M-{ and M-} are equally easy to type.
> > 
> > Also, let's call these commands forward-error-source-file
> > and backward-error-source-file.
> 
> Ditto as above.
> 

Ditto.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk