111–120 of 250 posts
The whole point of Emacs is that it is a radically customizable platform, and if you don't like the behavior of some feature you can modify it yourself with a few lines of Lisp. Forking the whole project over a change to one obscure feature makes zero sense.
Status: Emacs user since it was implemented as TECO macros (1981 or so), but I don't use registers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what I've been wondering here, as well. So far, the downsides (Change to an almost subconscious muscle-memory-task, added friction) of this are pretty apparent - what even are the upsides of this?
Attracting new users for with the old behaviour is too complex maybe?
So, what's the "other side's" argument in this? Usually these opinionated changes come with some level-headed reasoning behind the changes. Or maybe not?
This is what I've been wondering here, as well. So far, the downsides (Change to an almost subconscious muscle-memory-task, added friction) of this are pretty apparent - what even are the upsides of this?
The only clue I see is in the polite objection the author quotes who writes "I agree it's safer..."
But I don't understand safer in what way or why 1 person gets to decide safer=better=forced.
”it looks like you are trying to create a buffer that is not attached to a file. If that is actually what you intended please confirm with RET so that the buffer can be created but keep in mind that. . .”
OpenSource working as intended, no?
Even the best working system will still require people to make good decisions to have the best outcomes.
Arguing that because something has been committed to the development branch it can't be reverted, is a terrible policy.
In lisp alone, you can get the old behavior back if you want it.
I think usability decisions like this are one of the harder things to decide by committee in an open source project because they are, at the end of the day, questions of taste. And people can have conflicting and equally valid tastes. Here, a swap is being made between editing speed and accuracy, with the one perhaps having the better claim for purely historical reasons (but if you let historical reasons dictate design, you end up with faster horses not cars).
Me personally, I'm a committed emacs user and I don't have skin in this game. If I don't like the new UI, I'll just add the necessary code to swap it out for the old UI.
Maybe let's keep the drama down a bit? There was a change committed which made using registers more friendly to use for newbies. IMHO, working on making Emacs' features more accessible is a good thing. And yes, this of course annoys old-school Emacs users (including me). AFAICS the discussion is still very much in progress. There will be an option added to be able to revert to the old behavior. There's still discussi…
Probably because, and it certainly appears the case, that the process is being ruled by fiat not by good technical/policy decisions (and the approach of broadcast is intended to replace the fiat by overwhelming numbers)
It's totally fine to disagree with people. Agreeing with people while doing the complete opposite, is quite unacceptable, in my opinion.