[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Jensen) writes: > I assume you replied to me by mistake, Daniel, so I'm > sending this to bongo-devel now.
Oh, sorry. Yes, my mistake. > Daniel Brockman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Jensen) writes: >> >>> Now that you mention it, perhaps Bongo should have a `M-&' >>> command as well. For example, `% m something RET M-& r' >>> seems reasonable. We could steal the implementation from Gnus. >> >> I'm not entirely opposed to the idea, but maybe `r' should >> follow the same "process/prefix convention" as `k', `c', et al.? > > I guess it could, but then I also think I'd want to use `r' > on a single line even when there are marked tracks around. You could always do `1 r' or `C-SPC C-SPC n r'... > The nice thing about `M-&' is that users can use it for > things that we never thought of. Every Bongo command will > have support for marks, in a way. I suppose that's true. But let's at least try to think about which commands should have support for marks. You mentioned `r'. Looking at `M-x bongo TAB TAB', I can't really think of any others for which it makes much sense. Can you think of any? Perhaps `t'/`T'. I don't think it would be useful to let these commands operate on marked tracks, but it might be useful to let them operate on active regions. We wouldn't want `y' to follow the "prefix/region/marking" convention (which I guess would be a better name for this), but I guess typing `M-& y' to force `y' to yank something in multiple places makes sense... Then of course there are probably other, non-Bongo-specific commands which we won't ever think of, --- as you say, --- but which some users may eventually want to use with `M-&'. User-defined Bongo commands pose other potential use cases. The more I think about it, the more it seems like a good idea. >>> Interesting. Undo for marks never crossed my mind. >>> Frankly, it strikes me as a bit overkill. Maybe I'd use >>> it for undoing `U', but that's all I can think of. >>> Or maybe I need a little persuasion? >> >> The main reason I consider it important is that undoing a >> killing of all marked tracks should be possible and DTRT. > > The tracks will be remarked when you undo a kill? > That's sensible. Exactly. >> By the way, would you be opposed to moving `U' somewhere >> else and putting `bongo-unmark-backward' on `U' instead? >> For example, Ibuffer has the "unmark all" command on `* *'. > > I kind of like `U'. It gets my vote. I'll leave it there, then. (The reason why I wanted to move it was to follow the proto-convention of having uppercase keys do backward what the lowercase key does --- `T', `M'.) You are probably right. The "unmark all" command deserves a good binding (besides, "unmark backward" already has DEL). -- Daniel Brockman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ bongo-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bongo-devel
