and while they do almost what I want, they don't do it exactly. After executing one of these functions, point is moved to the first column, whereas I want it, of course, to stay in the same column. I've tinkered with current-column and set-goal-column, but without success. Surprisingly, there doesn't seem to be a function to move the point to a specific column. What am I missing?
Michael Schuerig <mich...@schuerig.de> writes: > Surprisingly, there doesn't seem to be a function to move the point to > a specific column. What am I missing?
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:31:41 +0100 Michael Schuerig <mich...@schuerig.de> wrote:
MS> Johan Bockgård wrote: >> Michael Schuerig <mich...@schuerig.de> writes:
>>> Surprisingly, there doesn't seem to be a function to move the point >>> to a specific column. What am I missing?
>> move-to-column
MS> Thanks, that does what I want. I have absolutely no idea why I didn't MS> find it myself.
Well, you have goto-line and goto-char, but then there's move-to-column and move-to-window-line. Not to mention jump-to-register. I usually end up doing M-x apropos no matter what.
Ted Zlatanov wrote: > On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:31:41 +0100 Michael Schuerig > <mich...@schuerig.de> wrote:
> MS> Johan Bockgård wrote: >>> Michael Schuerig <mich...@schuerig.de> writes:
>>>> Surprisingly, there doesn't seem to be a function to move the point >>>> to a specific column. What am I missing?
>>> move-to-column
> MS> Thanks, that does what I want. I have absolutely no idea why I > didn't MS> find it myself.
> Well, you have goto-line and goto-char, but then there's > move-to-column > and move-to-window-line. Not to mention jump-to-register. I usually > end up doing M-x apropos no matter what.
Yes, that's exactly what I did, repeatedly. Still, I didn't notice move-to-column.
> Ted Zlatanov wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:31:41 +0100 Michael Schuerig > > <mich...@schuerig.de> wrote:
> > MS> Johan Bockgård wrote: > >>> Michael Schuerig <mich...@schuerig.de> writes:
> >>>> Surprisingly, there doesn't seem to be a function to move the point > >>>> to a specific column. What am I missing?
> >>> move-to-column
> > MS> Thanks, that does what I want. I have absolutely no idea why I > > didn't MS> find it myself.
> > Well, you have goto-line and goto-char, but then there's > > move-to-column > > and move-to-window-line. Not to mention jump-to-register. I usually > > end up doing M-x apropos no matter what.
> Yes, that's exactly what I did, repeatedly. Still, I didn't notice > move-to-column.
On Jan 16, 11:12 am, Ted Zlatanov <t...@lifelogs.com> wrote:
i think there's something desired here...
i vaguely recall also wanted move-to-column, but i recall thought it didn't exist. Yes of course i knew apropos, and elisp-index-search and reasonably familiar with elisp and its manual.
I think it would be great that in the function's in-line doc, it would say related functions. For example, if one looks up on goto-line, then at the bottom it might say:
> i vaguely recall also wanted move-to-column, but i recall thought it > didn't exist. Yes of course i knew apropos, and elisp-index-search and > reasonably familiar with elisp and its manual.
> I think it would be great that in the function's in-line doc, it would > say related functions. For example, if one looks up on goto-line, then > at the bottom it might say:
Note that listing related functions in a function's doc is in many programing manuals. e.g Mathematica, MS's JScript, PHP ... they are quite useful. Because for those not expert yet of a lang (which is majority), often they do not know similar functions or do not know if there's manual section that list such, and often are confused about the differences of many functions that seems the same ....
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 10:23:23 -0800 (PST) Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> wrote:
XL> i vaguely recall also wanted move-to-column, but i recall thought it XL> didn't exist. Yes of course i knew apropos, and elisp-index-search and XL> reasonably familiar with elisp and its manual.
XL> I think it would be great that in the function's in-line doc, it would XL> say related functions. For example, if one looks up on goto-line, then XL> at the bottom it might say:
XL> See also: goto-char, move-to-column, ...
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 10:29:45 -0800 (PST) Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> wrote:
XL> Note that listing related functions in a function's doc is in many XL> programing manuals. e.g Mathematica, MS's JScript, PHP ... they are XL> quite useful. Because for those not expert yet of a lang (which is XL> majority), often they do not know similar functions or do not know if XL> there's manual section that list such, and often are confused about XL> the differences of many functions that seems the same ....
I agree this would be useful. It's best done with tags IMO, rather than explicitly listing the related functions. For example, motion commands should be tagged "motion" and then every command with that tag can automatically list every motion command. The key is that the extra work is in classification, not in tediously listing every command's peers.
Tags I could use: motion, file, coding-system, menu, buffer, process
Each package should probably tag its commands with the package name.
Short tags are not always descriptive enough, but long tags get unpleasantly verbose so the real art is in balancing between the two.
Anything more hierarchical than tags is painful to manage in the long run.
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 10:23:23 -0800 (PST) Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> XL> i vaguely recall also wanted move-to-column, but i recall thought it > XL> didn't exist. Yes of course i knew apropos, and elisp-index-search and > XL> reasonably familiar with elisp and its manual.
> XL> I think it would be great that in the function's in-line doc, it would > XL> say related functions. For example, if one looks up on goto-line, then > XL> at the bottom it might say:
> XL> See also: goto-char, move-to-column, ...
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 10:29:45 -0800 (PST) Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> XL> Note that listing related functions in a function's doc is in many > XL> programing manuals. e.g Mathematica, MS's JScript, PHP ... they are > XL> quite useful. Because for those not expert yet of a lang (which is > XL> majority), often they do not know similar functions or do not know if > XL> there's manual section that list such, and often are confused about > XL> the differences of many functions that seems the same ....
> I agree this would be useful. It's best done with tags IMO, rather than > explicitly listing the related functions. For example, motion commands > should be tagged "motion" and then every command with that tag can > automatically list every motion command. The key is that the extra work > is in classification, not in tediously listing every command's peers.
> Tags I could use: motion, file, coding-system, menu, buffer, process
> Each package should probably tag its commands with the package name.
> Short tags are not always descriptive enough, but long tags get > unpleasantly verbose so the real art is in balancing between the two.
> Anything more hierarchical than tags is painful to manage in the long run.
