On 9 January 2014 13:58, kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com> wrote: > yes this lead to endless debate, but I think this is good because we see > diffirent ways into looking into things. I have to admit till today I never > expected that someone would be against confirm dialogs to such extend of > wanting them to be removed completely, but I can see now that for people > that dont make mistakes or they rather live with these mistakes would > prefer a non confirmation approach. Its good to discuss these things > because next time I will try to "fix" something I will try to do it in a > way that pleases most people and not interrupting their workflow. > > Thanks. I'm glad i've been heard.
> And its endless because people prefer diffirent things, and thats ok. > Opinions should be expressed and be respected. Opinions matter to make > software better . Afterall software is made to please people by doing the > things they want . No software of course is perfect. :) > > > I completely respect Igor's opinion. And Igor its great you have worked on > these things and thank you :) You should promote your work I think progress > should be more carefully logged so we can all appreciate the work that goes > inside pharo :) > > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr>wrote: > >> >> On 09 Jan 2014, at 12:37, Igor Stasenko <siguc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On 9 January 2014 12:13, Igor Stasenko <siguc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 9 January 2014 11:27, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On 09 Jan 2014, at 11:11, kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I was the one that worked on CMD+L dialog. I posted my slice here and >>>> it was discussed. I tried to implement undo, but trying to understand undo >>>> was a pain in the ass. >>>> >>>> >>>> I reviewed it and you are not to blame: A key combination that *loses >>>> code* is not acceptable, and as we discussed in the past, this >>>> change was needed and good. >>>> >>>> Yes, and i agreed on that. >>> My only complaint is that instead of making things work, we reversed it >>> and made things even worse. >>> >>> >>>> The people who use the (undocumented!) cmd-L can easily get rid of the >>>> warning by implementing Undo. >>>> >>>> how many modern editors document that pressing home key will move >>> cursor to beginning of line? or pressing cmd-v will paste things from >>> clipboard? >>> i do not think this is a good criteria to disable feature(s) only >>> because they either not documented properly or that someone has no idea it >>> exists. >>> >> >> yes, to be fair, the Cmd-L was not disabled, but *crippled* , enough that >> its usefulness become very low. >> because before i knew that i can type any garbage in any editor window >> and undo all with single keystroke, >> and now i have to be interrupted with yes/no popup. >> >> Can i ask, why consoles do not ask you are you sure you want to face >> consequences of you pressed ctrl-c? >> >> >> Undo works for ctrl-c. Fo ctrl-l it does not. >> >> (I really wonder why we have this dissuasion: It was already last time >> said that if the key combination removes >> code *without a change to get it back* it needs to warn, if people do not >> like the warning they should >> a) implement undo for ctrl-l >> b) remove the warning. >> >> Marcus >> > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
