Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'.

[David Kastrup]

Artur Malabarba <address@hidden> writes:

> 2015-11-13 6:04 GMT+00:00 Pierpaolo Bernardi <address@hidden>:
>> The old behaviour is: ctrl-o inserts a newline after the point,
>> nothing else is done.
>
> Ok, thanks for clarifying. Still can I ask for an example usage where
> that behaviour is good and the current behaviour is bad.

I want to break a line before a line-ending comment (single ;) and
change that line-ending comment to a line comment (double ;;)
afterwards.  If Emacs gets a chance at indenting before I get a chance
at editing, it will even make a total mess of the comment line even when
it is doing everything "correctly" according to the current look of the
line.

More often than not, however, I use C-o when I know that Emacs'
indenting is going to be terminally wrong anyway.

But of course not having the material run away automatically before I
get a chance at editing it is also a valid consideration.

> I'm not trying to be annoying here. It's just that I want to clearly
> list all relevant scenarios when I write the commit message (so that
> future hackers will know about them before changing some behaviour).

Frankly, I cannot imagine your C-o behavior to be useful at all since
C-o is intentionally a dumb command to revert to for incremental
editing.  You use it either when you don't want automatic indentation,
or if you still have material to add on the current line.  And if you
still have material to add on the current line, it will likely be
relevant for indentation, so it's comparatively useless for C-o to
indent prematurely.

If not, there is still C-M-o bound to split-line rather than C-o bound
to open-line.

-- 
David Kastrup