[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-x C-v considered harmful
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: C-x C-v considered harmful |
Date: |
Sat, 11 Jul 2009 06:06:40 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.94 (gnu/linux) |
> I've just made C-x C-v obey confirm-nonexistent-file-or-buffer (as they
> should have from the beginning) which should fix the OP's problem.
> I'm sorry, but you seem to have misunderstood: My problem with C-x C-v
> is its behavior in killing buffers, not in how it finds files. (That is
> why I did not respond to your earlier post; as one who has never
> *deliberately* invoked C-x C-v, I have no opinion.)
But it does fix the OP's particular case because the RET would have
asked to "[Confirm]" since here was no "d" file (or directory).
Stefan
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, (continued)
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, M Jared Finder, 2009/07/02
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Miles Bader, 2009/07/02
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Richard Stallman, 2009/07/03
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Andreas Schwab, 2009/07/03
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Miles Bader, 2009/07/03
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Markus Triska, 2009/07/03
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/05
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Bob Rogers, 2009/07/05
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Bob Rogers, 2009/07/13
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/14
Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/02