[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'.
From: |
John Wiegley |
Subject: |
Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'. |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:28:05 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) |
> You are welcome to re-reading the past discussions about
> electric-indent-mode. Good luck keeping your sanity while at that ;-)
Looking at electric-indent-mode, the defaults are actually quite sane: The
only thing that engages electric indentation by default is insertion of a
newline. The user can also manually engage it using C-j.
I'm all for this, since swapping the meaning of C-m and C-j is something I
used to have to do in nearly every mode I use. I never understood why hitting
return in a programming mode should always take me to column 0. However, C-o
at column 0 is something many of us have come to depend on.
One way to fix this is to set a default for `electric-indent-functions' that
pays attention to this particular scenario, and suppresses electric indent in
that case. This leaves it open to users to customize away the suppression.
This keeps the electric default, and C-o-at-0 users are not surprised. Does
that sound reasonable?
John
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., (continued)
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., John Wiegley, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Karl Fogel, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Alan Mackenzie, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., John Wiegley, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Karl Fogel, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., John Wiegley, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., David Kastrup, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., David Kastrup, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'.,
John Wiegley <=
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., John Wiegley, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Alan Mackenzie, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., John Wiegley, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Artur Malabarba, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Paul Eggert, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., John Wiegley, 2015/11/11
- Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/11/11
Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'., Artur Malabarba, 2015/11/11