On 9 January 2014 14:03, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote:
> > On 09 Jan 2014, at 13:59, 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. > > > > 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 :) > > > > A editor key combination that looses code because is does not support undo > is *wrong*. Completely and utterly *wrong*. > > Crippling the feature is *wrong*. Completely and utterly *wrong*. As we all agreed , the proper fix to cmd-l problem is make it undoable. An *improper* fix is put warnings everywhere. Warnings do not prevent from mistakes, they just do things worse at times. That's all what wanted to say. > > Marcus > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
