Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-13 Thread Richard Stallman
> However, if the only function of that code is to implement this > feature, it might easy to reimplement the feature in a simpler way. Indeed. Feel free to give it a try. ___ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.o

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-12 Thread Stefan Monnier
> So does anyone besides me see it as a problem that mouse-drag-region > does not return when the mouse drag is complete, but instead requires > yet another event of some kind (any kind) after the mouse-up to let it > return? Is that not a new bug? That functionality was really what was > behind

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-12 Thread Stefan Monnier
> To fix this problem, I maybe mouse-show-mark should be rewritten to > not use (read-event), but instead to use something like > pre-command-hook. > I think that is too risky. The reason this code has some bugs > is that there is no obvious simple rule for what it should do. > I coul

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-11 Thread Richard Stallman
So does anyone besides me see it as a problem that mouse-drag-region does not return when the mouse drag is complete, but instead requires yet another event of some kind (any kind) after the mouse-up to let it return? Is that not a new bug? That function's is to implement the mous

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-10 Thread Richard Stallman
It *could* be that this is a bug introduced when mouse-show-mark was rearranged, and what was intended was really: (if transient-mark-mode (delete-overlay mouse-drag-overlay) (move-overlay mouse-drag-overlay (point) (mark t)) I recall making that change inten

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-10 Thread JD Smith
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 18:37 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: > It *could* be that this is a bug introduced when mouse-show-mark was > rearranged, and what was intended was really: > > (if transient-mark-mode > (delete-overlay mouse-drag-overlay) > (move-overlay mouse-

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-09 Thread Stefan Monnier
>> I noticed that setting the transient-mark-mode variable no longer does >> anything >> >> As far as I can see, it still does what it always did. >> Did you actually observe that it fails to work? > Only in so far as I expected transient-mark-mode to allow mouse-drag- > region to return upon mou

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-09 Thread JD Smith
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 10:41 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: > The change you've observed is probably due to a change in the code of > mouse-drag-region. I suggest you look at the code and see what's > going on. OK, I've had a look, and think I've figured it out. Aside from the superficial differ

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-09 Thread Richard Stallman
The change you've observed is probably due to a change in the code of mouse-drag-region. I suggest you look at the code and see what's going on. ___ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-08 Thread JD Smith
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 08:02 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: > I noticed that setting the transient-mark-mode variable no longer does > anything > > As far as I can see, it still does what it always did. > Did you actually observe that it fails to work? Only in so far as I expected transien

Re: transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-08 Thread Richard Stallman
I noticed that setting the transient-mark-mode variable no longer does anything As far as I can see, it still does what it always did. Did you actually observe that it fails to work? But I see that the doc string of the variable says that setting it does nothing. That doc string is erron

transient-mark-mode in 22.0

2005-06-06 Thread JD Smith
Transient mark mode seems to have changed in behavior between 21.X and 22.x. I had formerly used it, along with mouse-drag-region, to temporarily highlight regions of text to operate on. Binding this to a down-mouse event, I could mouse-down drag mouse-up and the function would complete. Now, m