From: Dani M. <dmo...@gm...> - 2012-02-27 21:01:44
|
>> What does "leaving mark behind" mean exactly here? It seem to mean >> "setting the mark at point, and then moving the point". At least it >> is the behavior I observe. > > What else could it possibly mean? I don't know, but "to leave X behind" does not imply to move "X" from its original position. So this wording seems confusing to me. >> But this behavior is undesirable (IMO - this is a movement command. >> whats the point of setting the mark here?) > > A conditional could, and frequently does, enclose a large portion of > the code. Leaving the mark where you were lets you get back there > with "C-x C-x", obviously, which is a convenience. In general, Emacs > commands that could potentially move a long way leave the mark behind. > >> and inconsistent with analogous movement commands such as >> `forward-list'. > > There's no need for consistency in all movement commands. In > particular, those that generally move short distances need not behave > the same as the other kind. > Consistency is a good design principle to follow, unless there is good reason not to. And frankly, I don't see a good reason here. > And you have "C-u C-c C-n" to do what you want. And if "C-c C-n" didn't set the mark, you would have "C-SPC C-c C-n" to do what you want. -- Dani Moncayo |