[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?! |
Date: |
25 Feb 2004 12:05:22 +0200 |
> Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help
> From: Floyd Davidson <floyd@barrow.com>
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:31:51 -0900
> Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:121236
> Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+eliz=elta.co.il@gnu.org
> >
> >For example, "M-g M-g" is invaluable as a means to fix bad
> >font-lock fontifications (a.k.a. syntax highlighting).
>
> That is not a default binding for either GNU Emacs or XEmacs, so
> I'm not positive which function you have bound to it.
Did you try "C-h c M-g M-g"? In my Emacs it says
M-g M-g runs the command font-lock-fontify-block
AFAICS, this is the default binding of GNU Emacs since Emacs 20.x at
least (couldn't check in Emacs 19 where I'm typing this).
> Incidentally, with XEmacs the default binding for M-g is the
> goto-line function.
Yes, we considered this during development of Emacs 20.1 and rejected
this binding, since M-g is a prefix of commands that change fonts and
text properties like bold, underlined, etc.
> >If you find yourself using goto-line too often, you should take a good
> >look at the way you use Emacs: most uses of goto-line should be
> >unnecessary because Emacs interface with various programs that report
> >line numbers, such as compilers, Grep, etc., have commands to
> >automatically visit the file and line number being reported.
>
> If you are not using goto-line you are missing a very quick way
> to move around in files.
I was serious. If you have serious counter-arguments why goto-line is
better then "C-x `" and its ilk, please tell.
In a nutshell, the reason why goto-line should not be a frequently
used command is that normally there's no reason to want to get to line
number N unless you have a program that told you there's something
interesting on that line.
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, (continued)
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Jiri Pejchal, 2004/02/24
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Floyd Davidson, 2004/02/24
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Kevin Rodgers, 2004/02/24
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Floyd Davidson, 2004/02/24
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Eli Zaretskii, 2004/02/25
- Message not available
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Floyd Davidson, 2004/02/25
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Kai Grossjohann, 2004/02/25
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Message not available
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Floyd Davidson, 2004/02/25
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Eli Zaretskii, 2004/02/26
- Message not available
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Jesper Harder, 2004/02/26
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, David Kastrup, 2004/02/26
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Floyd L. Davidson, 2004/02/26
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Alan Mackenzie, 2004/02/27
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Eli Zaretskii, 2004/02/27
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Johan Bockgård, 2004/02/27
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, David Kastrup, 2004/02/27
- Re: Newbie: Interactive goto-line ?!, Johan Bockgård, 2004/02/27