Re: line-move-visual

[David Kastrup]

Joseph Brenner <doom@kzsu.stanford.edu> writes:

> Evans Winner <thorne@unm.edu> writes:
>
> But this isn't the solution to the problem at hand.
>
>> I have read a number of posts on the devel list discussing the
>> question of how to communicate with Emacs users about things like
>> proposed changes to defaults.
>
> The right answer is that you should not be changing the defaults.
>
> If we really can't convince the developers that they need to respect
> backwards compatibility, an actual solution to the problem might
> be something like creating a switch that needs to be flipped on to
> get the new whizzy behavior, something like:
>
>   (setq modernize-emacs t)
>
> You then recommend that the default ~/.emacs for *new* users should
> include that line.

That means that new users live in a separate universe where they can't
expect older users to be able to help them with their setup and usage
problems.  Because the older users don't even have a clue about what new
users might be working with.

It also means that older users never will get to see newer user
interface features, even if they might better fit their workflow.

"In your face" is a strategy where people actually get to see things and
make a conscious decision about keeping or leaving them.  It is a matter
of courtesy to make any feature work as well as possible before
confronting users with it by default.

Something like font-locking required a lot of work before Emacs
developers felt it could be made the default (while it has been the
default for much longer with XEmacs, with partly dire consequences
because of less maturity).

Emacs evolves, and its community evolves and grows.  And there is
something to be said for the community members to know what they are
roughly talking about when having an exchange about Emacs.

And that implies a choice between evolution or stagnation of the default
behavior.  Emacs should show the best and most consistent behavior out
of the box, whether or not that implies change.

And that's what the discussion, if it is to be taken seriously, is
supposed to be about.

My personal preference would be that when recording and replaying
macros, the used functions for arrow keys should be logical rather than
visual mode commands.

The current state is not satisfactory with regard to macro recording.
Which does not mean that I don't like it as a default behavior
otherwise.

-- 
David Kastrup