Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

removing Emacs 21.2 fringes?

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Mikael Pettersson

unread,
May 14, 2002, 9:28:26 AM5/14/02
to
I recently upgraded to Emacs 21.2 from 20.7 (via RedHat Linux
7.2 -> 7.3 upgrade), and noticed that Emacs 21.2 puts what it
calls fringes at the left and right borders when running in X.

In my opinion, these fringes steal valuable screen space and
make the text look strangely indented. I really don't like them
(gross understatement).

If there a way to disable the fringes in Emacs 21.2 and use the
old-style indicators for long lines instead?

/Mikael
--
Mikael Pettersson (mi...@csd.uu.se)
Computing Science Department, Uppsala University

Stein A Stromme

unread,
May 14, 2002, 10:23:54 AM5/14/02
to
[Mikael Pettersson]

| If there a way to disable the fringes in Emacs 21.2 and use the
| old-style indicators for long lines instead?

Apparently not. You can perhaps make the irritation go away by
setting the color of the fringe to your liking, like this for example:

(set-face-background 'fringe (face-background 'default))

Stein
--
Stein Arild Strømme Tel: (+47) 2212 2521
Centre for Advanced Study Fax: (+47) 2212 2501
Drammensveien 78 <mailto:str...@mi.uib.no>
N-0271 Oslo, Norway <http://www.mi.uib.no/~stromme>

Kai Großjohann

unread,
May 14, 2002, 11:46:13 AM5/14/02
to
mi...@harpo.csd.uu.se (Mikael Pettersson) writes:

> In my opinion, these fringes steal valuable screen space and
> make the text look strangely indented. I really don't like them
> (gross understatement).

Please note that the right fringe was there in Emacs 20, too. It
only looked different. So what Emacs 21 is _actually_ "stealing" is
only the left fringe.

Emacs 20 would display space or \ or $ in the right-most column to
indicate continued or truncated lines, but never a real character.
Emacs 21 has the (right) fringe, instead, and displays arrows instead
of \ and $.

For the left fringe, Emacs 21 can display nifty little images there
that indicate the current line. For example, Oort Gnus has this (to
indicate the current line in the summary buffer). And GDB has it
(replacing the "=>" from earlier versions which obstructed the first
two characters of the line).

Maybe that reduces your hatred to a mere disliking.

kai
--
Silence is foo!

Matthias MEULIEN

unread,
May 14, 2002, 12:04:54 PM5/14/02
to
Kai.Gro...@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai =?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) wrote:

> For the left fringe, Emacs 21 can display nifty little images there
> that indicate the current line. For example, Oort Gnus has this (to
> indicate the current line in the summary buffer). And GDB has it
> (replacing the "=>" from earlier versions which obstructed the first
> two characters of the line).

Note that `hl-line-mode' is an analog.
--
Matthias

Phillip Lord

unread,
May 14, 2002, 12:28:02 PM5/14/02
to
>>>>> "Mikael" == Mikael Pettersson <mi...@harpo.csd.uu.se> writes:

Mikael> I recently upgraded to Emacs 21.2 from 20.7 (via RedHat
Mikael> Linux 7.2 -> 7.3 upgrade), and noticed that Emacs 21.2 puts
Mikael> what it calls fringes at the left and right borders when
Mikael> running in X.

Mikael> In my opinion, these fringes steal valuable screen space and
Mikael> make the text look strangely indented. I really don't like
Mikael> them (gross understatement).

Mikael> If there a way to disable the fringes in Emacs 21.2 and use
Mikael> the old-style indicators for long lines instead?


Stick with them. Seriously. They are off putting at first, but you get
used to them quickly enough. The long line indicator is a better than
before. The GUD current line indicator is much much better than
before.

As someone else point out, setting the fringe to the same colour as
the background helps a lot. I hardly notice them when they are not
being used now.

Phil

Sunil Patel

unread,
May 14, 2002, 1:36:40 PM5/14/02
to

> Stick with them. Seriously. They are off putting at first, but you
> get used to them quickly enough. The long line indicator is a
> better than before. The GUD current line indicator is much much
> better than before.

I'll second that one.....it took some minor getting used to....but I find
the fringe to be an advantage...give it a try for a couple of weeks, and
you'll forget it's even there...

-Sunil

A. L. Meyers

unread,
May 14, 2002, 2:43:14 PM5/14/02
to
Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but I see no fringes at all on
emacs in the text console. Thus assume the fringes are pure X fluff.

Lucien
--
If you receive this by error, please delete it and inform the sender.
PGP Key fingerprint=F1C0 D9AE 1B18 1405 4DFA B4CC 6DC7 FF78 C76E FB15
To Big Brother Echelon from "spook":
Qaddafi Honduras nuclear ammunition DES FBI Rule Psix Marxist Semtex SDI

Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>

unread,
May 14, 2002, 3:24:40 PM5/14/02
to
>>>>> "Kai" == Kai Großjohann <Kai.Gro...@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE> writes:
> Please note that the right fringe was there in Emacs 20, too. It
> only looked different. So what Emacs 21 is _actually_ "stealing" is
> only the left fringe.

It's not quite right. The right fringe not only looks different but also
can't (currently) contain the cursor which forces the wraparound of lines
to happen slightly differently (i.e. worse).
I wish someone could step forward to work on the code and allow the
cursor to be displayed in the right fringe, finally bridging the gap
between old tty-style "fringes" and the new stuff.


Stefan

Fredrik Staxeng

unread,
May 14, 2002, 5:57:45 PM5/14/02
to
Phillip Lord <p.l...@russet.org.uk> writes:

> >>>>> "Mikael" == Mikael Pettersson <mi...@harpo.csd.uu.se> writes:
>
> Mikael> I recently upgraded to Emacs 21.2 from 20.7 (via RedHat
> Mikael> Linux 7.2 -> 7.3 upgrade), and noticed that Emacs 21.2 puts
> Mikael> what it calls fringes at the left and right borders when
> Mikael> running in X.
>
> Mikael> In my opinion, these fringes steal valuable screen space and
> Mikael> make the text look strangely indented. I really don't like
> Mikael> them (gross understatement).
>
> Mikael> If there a way to disable the fringes in Emacs 21.2 and use
> Mikael> the old-style indicators for long lines instead?
>
>
> Stick with them. Seriously. They are off putting at first, but you get
> used to them quickly enough. The long line indicator is a better than
> before. The GUD current line indicator is much much better than
> before.

They make Emacs overflow it's half of the screen. I keep guessing,
do people today get less than 1024 pixels so side-by-side windows don't
work anyway, or do they get 1280, so there are 160 that can't be
used to increase the font size?

--
Fredrik Stax\"ang | rot13: sf...@hcqngr.hh.fr

Glenn Morris

unread,
May 14, 2002, 7:34:33 PM5/14/02
to

[warning - zero useful content]

Mikael Pettersson wrote:

> In my opinion, these fringes steal valuable screen space and make the
> text look strangely indented. I really don't like them (gross
> understatement).

I feel to moved to point out that I *like* the fringe - someone has to
defend the poor, beleaguered thing! :)

Miles Bader

unread,
May 14, 2002, 7:40:42 PM5/14/02
to
"A. L. Meyers" <nospa...@replyto.because.this.is.invalid> writes:
> Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but I see no fringes at all on
> emacs in the text console. Thus assume the fringes are pure X fluff.

There is a right `fringe' but it's the same color as the rest of the
display, so it's not obvious. In fact, as has been mentioned, all
versions of emacs have this; it's the left fringe that's new (in X).

-Miles
--
Next to fried food, the South has suffered most from oratory.
-- Walter Hines Page

Miles Bader

unread,
May 14, 2002, 7:48:44 PM5/14/02
to
Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
> They make Emacs overflow it's half of the screen. I keep guessing,
> do people today get less than 1024 pixels so side-by-side windows don't
> work anyway, or do they get 1280, so there are 160 that can't be
> used to increase the font size?

Kinda depends on which font you use, doesn't it? I use `6x13' whic
nicely fits two windows side-by-side onto a 1024-pixel wide display.

The default font is too big to allow two windows side-by-side regardless
of the fringes. That's the basic point, I guess: they don't really make
much difference except in the rare case where you have two windows that
_exactly_ fit (and in particular, aren't a problem with a 1024-pixel
wide, 80-column wide windows, and fonts of 6-, 7-, or 8-pixel width).

-Miles
--
Suburbia: where they tear out the trees and then name streets after them.

Fredrik Staxeng

unread,
May 15, 2002, 3:40:28 AM5/15/02
to
Miles Bader <mi...@gnu.org> writes:

> Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
> > They make Emacs overflow it's half of the screen. I keep guessing,
> > do people today get less than 1024 pixels so side-by-side windows don't
> > work anyway, or do they get 1280, so there are 160 that can't be
> > used to increase the font size?
>
> Kinda depends on which font you use, doesn't it? I use `6x13' whic
> nicely fits two windows side-by-side onto a 1024-pixel wide display.

If want side-by-side windows, the font can be 6 pixels wide on
1024, and 7 pixels wide on 1152. There are no fonts with fractional
widths.

> The default font is too big to allow two windows side-by-side regardless
> of the fringes. That's the basic point, I guess: they don't really make
> much difference except in the rare case where you have two windows that
> _exactly_ fit (and in particular, aren't a problem with a 1024-pixel
> wide, 80-column wide windows, and fonts of 6-, 7-, or 8-pixel width).

You make it sound that this happened by accident. The primary requirement
when I select the font is to make side-by-side windows fit. Using 6x13
would be possible, but I'd rather stay with Emacs 20. A good font is
very important, And I like Lucida Typewriter 12 very much.

Anyway, apparently it is possible to turn the fringes off in the development
version of Emacs. Probably the Emacs maintainer have learnt their lesson,
and will refrain from further horizontal expansions in the future.

Kai Großjohann

unread,
May 15, 2002, 7:14:20 AM5/15/02
to
Glenn Morris <rgm22@_REMOVETHIS_cam.ac.uk> writes:

> I feel to moved to point out that I *like* the fringe - someone has to
> defend the poor, beleaguered thing! :)

Same here! Just use a nice background color for it.

Kai Großjohann

unread,
May 15, 2002, 7:13:49 AM5/15/02
to
"Stefan Monnier <f...@acm.com>" <monnier+gnu.emacs.help/news/@flint.cs.yale.edu> writes:

> It's not quite right. The right fringe not only looks different but also
> can't (currently) contain the cursor which forces the wraparound of lines
> to happen slightly differently (i.e. worse).

I never noticed. Thanks for the correction.

Dan Mills

unread,
May 15, 2002, 1:42:10 PM5/15/02
to
"Stefan Monnier <f...@acm.com>" <monnier+gnu.emacs.help/news/@flint.cs.yale.edu> writes:

> >>>>> "Kai" == Kai Großjohann <Kai.Gro...@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE> writes:
> > Please note that the right fringe was there in Emacs 20, too. It
> > only looked different. So what Emacs 21 is _actually_ "stealing" is
> > only the left fringe.
>
> It's not quite right. The right fringe not only looks different but also
> can't (currently) contain the cursor which forces the wraparound of lines
> to happen slightly differently (i.e. worse).

But this is only in the case where the line is exactly the width of
the frame (minus the fringes, of course). Once you write more, the
behavior is the same between the tty mode and the new fringes--that
is, under tty mode, once the fringe is "visible" (the "\"
cont. character has appeared), you can't position the cursor there
either.

Has anyone discussed the possibility of using half-width fringes?
They would probably look pretty crappy (imho), but they would be
functionally equivalent, and not use up any more screen real-estate
than the tty mode.

-Dan

--
"I could carve a better man out of a banana."
--Vonnegut, "Cat's Cradle"

Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>

unread,
May 15, 2002, 2:52:26 PM5/15/02
to
>>>>> "Fredrik" == Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
> when I select the font is to make side-by-side windows fit. Using 6x13

Have you tried to make the two windows overlap slightly ?
After all, if you don't want the fringe, you might as well have it hidden
under another window.

> A good font is very important

Indeed.

> Anyway, apparently it is possible to turn the fringes off in the development
> version of Emacs.

Yes. You can even turn them on/off separately on the left and on the right
and change their size (with some non-negligible constraints, tho).

> Probably the Emacs maintainer have learnt their lesson,

I don't think so. They just implement functionality step by step.


Stefan

Fredrik Staxeng

unread,
May 15, 2002, 3:12:56 PM5/15/02
to
"Stefan Monnier <f...@acm.com>" <monnier+gnu.emacs.help/news/@flint.cs.yale.edu> writes:

> >>>>> "Fredrik" == Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
> > when I select the font is to make side-by-side windows fit. Using 6x13
>
> Have you tried to make the two windows overlap slightly ?
> After all, if you don't want the fringe, you might as well have it hidden
> under another window.

Yes, I have to suffer that until the next version comes out. It's not
a terrible hardship, but since I use click-to-focus it is mildly annoying.
I replied to somebody who seemed to think that there really was no good
reason to turn the fringes off.

> > Anyway, apparently it is possible to turn the fringes off in the development
> > version of Emacs.
>
> Yes. You can even turn them on/off separately on the left and on the right
> and change their size (with some non-negligible constraints, tho).

I'll probably keep the left one. After all, I have eight pixels to spare,
fifteen if I decrease the window width to 79.

> > Probably the Emacs maintainer have learnt their lesson,
>
> I don't think so. They just implement functionality step by step.

Everything else, scrollbars, menus, toolbars you can turn off. I think that
they simply did not realize that those few pixels can matter in some
cases. It's not like it's hugely more complicated implementation-wise to
make them optional.

Mikael Pettersson

unread,
May 15, 2002, 4:31:17 PM5/15/02
to
In article <m3y9eml...@shsbox1.uio.no>,

Stein A Stromme <str...@mi.uib.no> wrote:
>[Mikael Pettersson]
>
>| If there a way to disable the fringes in Emacs 21.2 and use the
>| old-style indicators for long lines instead?
>
>Apparently not.

After reading the emacs source code I have to concur -- they seem
to be unconditionally enabled under X.
Note: I know that older versions had a fringe-like thing at the
right border (for the familiar "\" continuation marker): it's
just the new left fringe I detest.

> You can perhaps make the irritation go away by
>setting the color of the fringe to your liking, like this for example:
>
> (set-face-background 'fringe (face-background 'default))

Well, what I did for now was to set the background to a stronger
shade of gray. If the fringe is invisible, then the effect is as
if the text is incorrectly indented -- with a clearly visible
border I at least don't have that problem.

Mikael Pettersson

unread,
May 15, 2002, 4:38:51 PM5/15/02
to
In article <vaf8z6m...@lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de>,

Kai Großjohann <Kai.Gro...@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE> wrote:
>For the left fringe, Emacs 21 can display nifty little images there
>that indicate the current line. For example, Oort Gnus has this (to
>indicate the current line in the summary buffer). And GDB has it
>(replacing the "=>" from earlier versions which obstructed the first
>two characters of the line).
>
>Maybe that reduces your hatred to a mere disliking.

If the left fringe was a per-buffer or per-mode option, sure
no problem as long as I can disable it if I want to.

Concerning continuation lines, the marker at the right fringe is
sufficient; the left fringe marker is just noise.
(IMO of course, but I dislike redundant clutter and "cute"-isms.)

Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>

unread,
May 15, 2002, 4:09:28 PM5/15/02
to
>>>>> "Fredrik" == Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
> they simply did not realize that those few pixels can matter in some cases.

It's generally not a good idea to assume that you're a very special case:
we've heard many people complain for all kinds of reasons since the very
early days of the Emacs-21 codebase (long before it got into beta testing),
so saying that we "did not realize" is just plain wrong.

I care about every single one of my 1800x1440 pixels and bitched about the
fringes, believe me. I now consider those few pixels a feature because they
make the text more legible (because it's not stuck against the window's
edge: they basically act like a margin) so I don't need to use a larger font
or a lower resolution.

> It's not like it's hugely more complicated implementation-wise to
> make them optional.

It was simply decided that it could wait for "after-21.1".
Especially since none of the complainers was willing to do the work.
The "cursor in the right fringe" issue is still waiting for a contributor,
by the way.


Stefan

Fredrik Staxeng

unread,
May 15, 2002, 6:29:01 PM5/15/02
to
"Stefan Monnier <f...@acm.com>" <monnier+gnu.emacs.help/news/@flint.cs.yale.edu> writes:

> >>>>> "Fredrik" == Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
> > they simply did not realize that those few pixels can matter in some cases.
>
> It's generally not a good idea to assume that you're a very special case:

I was simply assuming that this was an oversight, since you can turn off the
other stuff.

> we've heard many people complain for all kinds of reasons since the very
> early days of the Emacs-21 codebase (long before it got into beta testing),
> so saying that we "did not realize" is just plain wrong.

Before you used they when referring to the Emacs maintainers, now you use
we? Can I then assume that you speak for the Emacs maintainers?

> I care about every single one of my 1800x1440 pixels and bitched about the
> fringes, believe me. I now consider those few pixels a feature because they
> make the text more legible (because it's not stuck against the window's
> edge: they basically act like a margin) so I don't need to use a larger font
> or a lower resolution.

As I said before, I will keep the left fringe if I can get down to
eight pixels. I do like the feature, but my screen does not grow.

(1800 pixels gives you three windows side-by-side, and you still have
40 pixels left for window decorations. I think you should start to
consider it a two-page, rather than a three-page display)

Also, xterm puts a one-pixel margin before the first character,
which Emacs should do even if there are fringes.

> > It's not like it's hugely more complicated implementation-wise to
> > make them optional.
>
> It was simply decided that it could wait for "after-21.1".
> Especially since none of the complainers was willing to do the work.
> The "cursor in the right fringe" issue is still waiting for a contributor,
> by the way.

I don't think it is good policy to include things that pisses of many
of your current users, especially if you can't get the old behaviour.
I think it's resonable to require of the people (even if those people
happen to be yourself) who wants controversial features to make them

Dan Mills

unread,
May 15, 2002, 6:45:16 PM5/15/02
to
Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:

> I don't think it is good policy to include things that pisses of many
> of your current users, especially if you can't get the old behaviour.
> I think it's resonable to require of the people (even if those people
> happen to be yourself) who wants controversial features to make them
> optional.

I have heard that they are taking patches.

Miles Bader

unread,
May 15, 2002, 8:20:22 PM5/15/02
to
Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
> Before you used they when referring to the Emacs maintainers, now you use
> we? Can I then assume that you speak for the Emacs maintainers?

Of course not. He speaks for himself.

Not all emacs maintainers work on all features, but when you make general
and rather obnoxious assertions about `the emacs maintainers', you're
still likely to offend all of them...

Just sos you know.

-miles
--
Would you like fries with that?

Mikael Pettersson

unread,
May 15, 2002, 11:27:16 PM5/15/02
to
In article <5lhel9q...@rum.cs.yale.edu>,

Stefan Monnier <f...@acm.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Fredrik" == Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
>> Anyway, apparently it is possible to turn the fringes off in the development
>> version of Emacs.
>
>Yes. You can even turn them on/off separately on the left and on the right
>and change their size (with some non-negligible constraints, tho).

Thanks for the hint. I just finished building 21.2.50.2 from CVS, and
(set-frame-parameter nil 'left-fringe 0) does indeed do the trick!

Now just to figure out how to change the cursor back from the invert-style
21.2.50.2 uses and it's perfect...

Eli Zaretskii

unread,
May 15, 2002, 11:25:27 PM5/15/02
to
Fredrik Staxeng wrote:
>
> I don't think it is good policy to include things that pisses of many
> of your current users

There's no such policy; your conclusions are all wrong:

This feature doesn't piss off many users, just some.

The option to turn the fringes off (or do other customizations with it)
was added since Emacs 21.1 was released simply because in Emacs
everything should be customizable.

Emacs 21.1 went into the release cycle before that was done because you have
to draw the line somewhere. Otherwise, you'll never ship a new version.

Fredrik Staxeng

unread,
May 16, 2002, 2:23:09 AM5/16/02
to
Miles Bader <mi...@gnu.org> writes:

> Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
> > Before you used they when referring to the Emacs maintainers, now you use
> > we? Can I then assume that you speak for the Emacs maintainers?
>
> Of course not. He speaks for himself.

He did use we. That implies that he is speaking for a group, at least
it does in Swedish.

> Not all emacs maintainers work on all features, but when you make general
> and rather obnoxious assertions about `the emacs maintainers', you're
> still likely to offend all of them...
>
> Just sos you know.

It wasn't intended to be obnoxious.

Fredrik Staxeng

unread,
May 16, 2002, 2:33:28 AM5/16/02
to
Eli Zaretskii <el...@is.elta.co.il> writes:

> Fredrik Staxeng wrote:
> >
> > I don't think it is good policy to include things that pisses of many
> > of your current users
>
> There's no such policy; your conclusions are all wrong:

The senetence above is an opinion, not a conclusion. Maybe I should have
written "I think it would be a good policy to..."

> This feature doesn't piss off many users, just some.

They keep posting here at rate of several per week. That is not
conclusive, I know, but unless you do surveys you don't really
have better data.

> The option to turn the fringes off (or do other customizations with it)
> was added since Emacs 21.1 was released simply because in Emacs
> everything should be customizable.

Yes, And I am very happy about that.

> Emacs 21.1 went into the release cycle before that was done because you have
> to draw the line somewhere. Otherwise, you'll never ship a new version.

Of course.

Fredrik Staxeng

unread,
May 16, 2002, 2:34:41 AM5/16/02
to
Dan Mills <danm...@sandmill.org> writes:

> Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:
>
> > I don't think it is good policy to include things that pisses of many
> > of your current users, especially if you can't get the old behaviour.
> > I think it's resonable to require of the people (even if those people
> > happen to be yourself) who wants controversial features to make them
> > optional.
>
> I have heard that they are taking patches.

And I heard that it is already fixed in the development version.

Phillip Lord

unread,
May 16, 2002, 5:32:06 AM5/16/02
to
>>>>> "Fredrik" == Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:

Fredrik> Miles Bader <mi...@gnu.org> writes:

>> Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes: > Before you used
>> they when referring to the Emacs maintainers, now you use >we?
>> Can I then assume that you speak for the Emacs maintainers? Of
>> course not. He speaks for himself.

Fredrik> He did use we. That implies that he is speaking for a
Fredrik> group, at least it does in Swedish.

He said "we heard these sort of complaints", and, of course, he was
correct. There was a lot of moaning even when it got to beta
testing. It trickled out once people got used to it.

If you read back you'll see that his use of "we" does refer to a
group, but not necessarily to the maintainers.

Phil

Fredrik Staxeng

unread,
May 16, 2002, 7:04:24 AM5/16/02
to
Phillip Lord <p.l...@russet.org.uk> writes:

Please, if you have to do this kind of grammatical nit-picking,
at least get your quotes right.

Stefan wrote:

>It's generally not a good idea to assume that you're a very special case:

>we've heard many people complain for all kinds of reasons since the very

^^ this we, without any further qualification, could be interpreted in many
ways

>early days of the Emacs-21 codebase (long before it got into beta testing),
>so saying that we "did not realize" is just plain wrong.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This phrase is in opposition to my statement: "I think that they
simply did not realize..." where they clearly refers to the Emacs
maintainers.

I put in my question since I thought he was unclear in his use of we,
that his statements could possibly interpreted as the opinion of the Emacs
maintainers.

Can we leave third grade now?

Phillip Lord

unread,
May 16, 2002, 7:35:18 AM5/16/02
to
>>>>> "Fredrik" == Fredrik Staxeng <fst...@update.uu.se> writes:

Fredrik> Phillip Lord <p.l...@russet.org.uk> writes:

>> He said "we heard these sort of complaints", and, of course, he
>> was correct. There was a lot of moaning even when it got to beta
>> testing. It trickled out once people got used to it.
>>
>> If you read back you'll see that his use of "we" does refer to a
>> group, but not necessarily to the maintainers.

Fredrik> Please, if you have to do this kind of grammatical
Fredrik> nit-picking, at least get your quotes right.

I wasn't trying to nit-pick, just point out the possible source of the
confusion. My quote was meant to be a paraphrase, otherwise I would
have used a cut and paste.


Fredrik> Stefan wrote:

>> It's generally not a good idea to assume that you're a very
>> special case: we've heard many people complain for all kinds of
>> reasons since the very

Fredrik> ^^ this we, without any further qualification, could be
Fredrik> interpreted in many ways

Which was what I was saying.

>> early days of the Emacs-21 codebase (long before it got into beta
>> testing), so saying that we "did not realize" is just plain
>> wrong.

Fredrik> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Fredrik> This phrase is in opposition to my statement: "I think that
Fredrik> they simply did not realize..." where they clearly refers
Fredrik> to the Emacs maintainers.

Ah the wonders of anaphoria. I would say that the second "we" refers
to the first "we", which is a group which includes the group referred
to as "they", but is not necessarily the same as.

Maybe I have missed my calling in life. Perhaps I should have become a
lawyer?

Fredrik> Can we leave third grade now?

I had to look third grade up on the web. To be honest it all looks rather
enjoyable....

Cheers

Phil

Fredrik Staxeng

unread,
May 16, 2002, 8:32:40 AM5/16/02
to
Phillip Lord <p.l...@russet.org.uk> writes:

> Fredrik> Can we leave third grade now?
>
> I had to look third grade up on the web. To be honest it all looks rather
> enjoyable....

Ouch! I intended that as a translation for the sarcastic Swedish expression
"småskolan", which literally means little school :-)

Phillip Lord

unread,
May 16, 2002, 8:47:46 AM5/16/02
to

Fredrik> Ouch! I intended that as a translation for the sarcastic
Fredrik> Swedish expression "smeskolan", which literally means
Fredrik> little school :-)

We use "primary school" in the UK. Or "Nursery". But this is before
the age of compulsory education, and it makes you look a little bit
middle class....

Phil

Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>

unread,
May 16, 2002, 11:19:59 AM5/16/02
to
>> we've heard many people complain for all kinds of reasons since the very
>> early days of the Emacs-21 codebase (long before it got into beta testing),
>> so saying that we "did not realize" is just plain wrong.
> Before you used they when referring to the Emacs maintainers, now you use
> we? Can I then assume that you speak for the Emacs maintainers?

I wasn't "a maintainer" when the fringes were introduced, for one,
which might explain why I jump between they and we. Another explanation
is that there's no "official line" or any such thing, so we're all
speaking for ourselves while at the same time being part of the same group
and having obviously been through similar things: having seen some of the
messages posted to our list and some of the replies, I know for a fact
that many of the maintainers have seen many such complaints and did realize
that some people wanted to be able to turn off the feature.
I.e. I'm not speaking for anybody else than myself, but that does not prevent
me from stating things about others if I've actually witnessed them.


Stefan

e...@ee.ryerson.ca

unread,
May 16, 2002, 1:34:23 PM5/16/02
to
Phillip Lord <p.l...@russet.org.uk> writes:

> Stick with them. Seriously. They are off putting at first, but you get
> used to them quickly enough.

This sounds remarkably like those discussions between
letter-boxed-movie lovers and pan-and-scan (TV format) movies...

Simon Josefsson

unread,
May 20, 2002, 3:45:52 PM5/20/02
to
Phillip Lord <p.l...@russet.org.uk> writes:

>>>>>> "Mikael" == Mikael Pettersson <mi...@harpo.csd.uu.se> writes:
>
> Mikael> I recently upgraded to Emacs 21.2 from 20.7 (via RedHat
> Mikael> Linux 7.2 -> 7.3 upgrade), and noticed that Emacs 21.2 puts
> Mikael> what it calls fringes at the left and right borders when
> Mikael> running in X.
>
> Mikael> In my opinion, these fringes steal valuable screen space and
> Mikael> make the text look strangely indented. I really don't like
> Mikael> them (gross understatement).
>
> Mikael> If there a way to disable the fringes in Emacs 21.2 and use
> Mikael> the old-style indicators for long lines instead?


>
>
> Stick with them. Seriously. They are off putting at first, but you get

> used to them quickly enough. The long line indicator is a better than
> before. The GUD current line indicator is much much better than
> before.

FWIW, if you are using RedHat 7.3, the arrow in GDB mode isn't visible
anyway, so this isn't a good argument. :-)

(I don't understand why it isn't, it is caused by loading their
python-mode.)

Phillip Lord

unread,
May 21, 2002, 9:30:59 AM5/21/02
to
>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Josefsson <j...@extundo.com> writes:

Simon> Phillip Lord <p.l...@russet.org.uk> writes:

>> Stick with them. Seriously. They are off putting at first, but
>> you get used to them quickly enough. The long line indicator is a
>> better than before. The GUD current line indicator is much much
>> better than before.

Simon> FWIW, if you are using RedHat 7.3, the arrow in GDB mode
Simon> isn't visible anyway, so this isn't a good argument. :-)

Simon> (I don't understand why it isn't, it is caused by loading
Simon> their python-mode.)


It should be, and if it isn't then I think that this is a bug, and
should probably be reported as such....


Phil

0 new messages