emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: C-x C-b and C-x C-f bugging about confirmation


From: Alfred M\. Szmidt
Subject: Re: C-x C-b and C-x C-f bugging about confirmation
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:35:15 +0100

   Chong Yidong wrote:
   > Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
   > 
   >>> why on earth does C-x C-b and C-x C-f ask me to confirm when I wish to
   >>> open a new buffer/file?
   >> So as to help prevent doing it by mistake when you mistyped.
   >> Set confirm-nonexistent-file-or-buffer to nil to get back the old
   >> behavior (or just hit RET twice, of course).
   > 
   > I see, I didn't realize you intended to make it the default.
   > 
   > I don't think it's a good default.  With minibuffer completion, typing
   > mistakes don't happen all that often, and it can be disconcerting to
   > have a RET rejected.  You might argue that it's no big deal to type a
   > second RET, but it's similarly no big deal to kill the buffer and try
   > again in the very few occasions that you make a mistake.

   I often have dozens of buffers open, including "foo.lisp" and "foos/" and 
   completion is not the panacea.
   it IS a big deal to have to kill the buffer:
   with confirm-nonexistent-file-or-buffer = t:
   C-x b fo TAB [expands to "foo"] RET [confirm?] . TAB RET ==> foo.lisp
   with confirm-nonexistent-file-or-buffer = nil:
   C-x b fo TAB [expands to "foo"] RET [new buffer] C-x k RET C-x b Up . TAB 
RET 
   ==> foo.lisp

For the later example, if I open a file that I didn't intend to open,
I use C-x C-v (find-alternate-file) instead of killing the buffer, and
reopening the file.   

Maybe the tab completion could be better, having a modal very terse
confirmation question enabled by default, is not a good idea though;




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]