Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> You may argue that if a user binds one of the other commands that may >>> be regarded as a CUA movement command to a single key, CUA will not >>> work for that key -- which is true, but then the user will have to add >>> the necessary CUA property too. I don't want to "pollude" the sources >>> with properties that are only needed in theory. But if you know of >>> some specific commands where it may be relevant, pls. tell me and I >>> will consider them case by case. > > Can't it be done 99% automatically, rather than with a symbol property? > E.g. use pre-command-hook to remember the buffer-before and tick-before; in > post-command-hook check whether the current buffer is still the same and > whether the tick count has changed and whether the command was bound to > a single key.
This is a really good suggestion -- I'll think about it. The main problem is that I need to set the mark _before_ the command if not already set. But it may just as well work to remember where point was before the command and set the mark _after_ executing the command. Must be careful with commands which sets deactivate-mark and there are probably other glitches... > > IIUC this is only actually used when the key was used with an additional > shift modifier (whereas the binding itself is to a non-shifted key) and it's > only used to mark&activate the region, so false positives are not too > harmful, right? True -- and for a few specific cases, the CUA property may be used to inhibit the marking for specific commands. -- Kim F. Storm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.cua.dk _______________________________________________ Emacs-pretest-bug mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
