[comp.emacs] Emacs not configurable enough?

kjones@talos.pm.com (Kyle Jones) (04/14/90)

pastor@PRC.UNISYS.COM writes:
 > There are many operations that I try to perform that cause GNU Emacs to
 > *FORCE* me to respond to one or more questions; for example, if I
 > 'touch' a c source file to force make to do a recompile (say, to
 > recompile with a debug switch after a program bombs), when I try to
 > edit the source file again GNU Emacs will not let me proceed until I
 > respond to its "Are you sure?" message.  Furthermore, in this and other
 > situations, GNU Emacs forces me to respond "yes" or "no".

This can be fixed by the putting the following in your .emacs
file:

(fset 'ask-user-about-supersession-threat
      '(lambda (&rest ignore) (clear-visited-file-modtime)))

If you go behind Emacs' back and touch a file, Emacs will say
nothing when you try to edit the old buffer or when you save it
later.  This code can be easily expanded to force Emacs to be
quiet only if a buffer local variable is non-nil, or the function
ask-user-about-supersession-threat can be made to diff the buffer
and the file, flip a coin or anything else you want in order to
decide whether editing an `obsolete' buffer should be allowed.

 > In an editor that is supposed to be user-reconfigurable, and is
 > supposed to be usable by both novice and expert users, I regard the
 > inability to disable what I've come to call "Nag mode" as a serious
 > bug.  I want the ability to tell Emacs to warn me if I'm about to do
 > something "stupid", but not to impede me.

But that's exactly what Emacs was doing.  It didn't stop you frmo editing
the file, it just demanded that you show that you understand the
consequences of your actions.  After all, someone else may have modified the
file you're editing, and it would important indeed that you be told that you
were about to edit a version of the file that's vastly different from
what's on disk, or that you were about to overwrite someone else's work.

 > I want the ability to tell Emacs to permit me to type 'y' or 'n' in
 > response to *ANY* question (i.e., always to act as though 'y-or-n-p' is
 > being called, rather then 'yes-or-no-p').

I don't think this would be wise.  Since Emacs allows typehead, you could
answer one of the y-or-n-p questions without even knowing it, with disaterous
results.  yes-or-no-p slows you down enough to read the question and to
answer it consciously.  There's much less likelihood of your typeahead
doing you in.

 > I don't want to be mothered by my editor -- if I say "do it" I want the
 > editor to do it *UNLESS* I have specifically requested it to look over
 > my shoulder.

The problem is that you don't always know when you need help, because you
can't keep track of everything.  Handling tedium is what computers are good
at; let them help you.  It's better to err on the side of caution.

 > While I'm at it, nobody has been able to tell me how to cure another
 > behavior that I also regard as a bug if it is not used-controllable. 
 > When I delete a window, I do not want the space thus liberated
 > distributed among all other windows; I have arranged my screen the way
 > I want it, and I don't want Emacs to mess with it.

Ok, you've got me there.  I don't see a way to do this in Lisp.
Presumably those laboring on version 19 read this group (or the
mailing list thereof) and will hear your cries.  Whether they
will hearken to them or not is anyone's guess.  Graduate
students are a peculiar breed.  (-:

kyle jones   <kjones@talos.pm.com>   ...!uunet!talos!kjones
"I'm a grad student.  Why would I want to paint my nails?"
   -- Louise Penberthy