GNU bug report logs - #43322
Confusing menu entry for cua-mode

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 43322 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 43322 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:41:13 -0700

Severity: wishlist

The menu item for cua-mode is, I claim unhelpfully, called "Shift
movement mark region (CUA)".  I am unable to parse what this even means
-- I thought it was about C-x and C-v, etc.?

Hmm... so after thinking about it for a while and reading the docstring,
I suppose it's saying that Shift-Left will mark things?  But that
already seems to be the case OOTB in "emacs -Q"?  OK, I give up...

Could we find a better name for this?

Message #8 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 09:54:39 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:41:13 -0700
> 
> The menu item for cua-mode is, I claim unhelpfully, called "Shift
> movement mark region (CUA)".  I am unable to parse what this even means
> -- I thought it was about C-x and C-v, etc.?

This doesn't appear by default, so the problem is not an acute one.

I think there's a typo there: it should say

  Shift movement marks the region (CUA)

Message #11 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 12:30:21 -0700

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
>> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:41:13 -0700
>>
>> The menu item for cua-mode is, I claim unhelpfully, called "Shift
>> movement mark region (CUA)".  I am unable to parse what this even means
>> -- I thought it was about C-x and C-v, etc.?
>
> This doesn't appear by default, so the problem is not an acute one.
>
> I think there's a typo there: it should say
>
>   Shift movement marks the region (CUA)

Ah, right, it's only enabled if cua-enable-cua-keys is nil...

    (bindings--define-key menu [cua-emulation-mode]
      (menu-bar-make-mm-toggle
       cua-mode
       "Shift movement mark region (CUA)"
       "Use shifted movement keys to set and extend the region"
       (:visible (and (boundp 'cua-enable-cua-keys)
		      (not cua-enable-cua-keys)))))

But even fixing the typo here seems like it produce the incorrect
result, because AFAICT the region is already extended using <S-left> in
"emacs -Q"?

Message #14 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 22:40:23 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 12:30:21 -0700
> Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> But even fixing the typo here seems like it produce the incorrect
> result, because AFAICT the region is already extended using <S-left> in
> "emacs -Q"?

What if the user turns off shift-select-mode?

Message #17 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:37:40 -0700

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> But even fixing the typo here seems like it produce the incorrect
>> result, because AFAICT the region is already extended using <S-left> in
>> "emacs -Q"?
>
> What if the user turns off shift-select-mode?

AFAICT, cua-mode respects shift-select-mode, which makes the menu entry
incorrect.

I tried using this, in emacs -Q:

(progn (setq cua-enable-cua-keys nil)
       (setq shift-select-mode nil)
       (cua-mode 1))

And I did not get "Shift movement mark region".  In fact, the only way
to change that is to set or unset shift-select-mode, with or without
cua-mode.

Message #20 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 22:57:30 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:37:40 -0700
> Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> > What if the user turns off shift-select-mode?
> 
> AFAICT, cua-mode respects shift-select-mode, which makes the menu entry
> incorrect.
> 
> I tried using this, in emacs -Q:
> 
> (progn (setq cua-enable-cua-keys nil)
>        (setq shift-select-mode nil)
>        (cua-mode 1))
> 
> And I did not get "Shift movement mark region".  In fact, the only way
> to change that is to set or unset shift-select-mode, with or without
> cua-mode.

So what do you propose to do about this bug report?

Message #23 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 21:17:42 +0000

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> AFAICT, cua-mode respects shift-select-mode, which makes the menu entry
>> incorrect.
>
> So what do you propose to do about this bug report?

We should probably replace "Shift movement mark region" with something
else.  But it's not clear to me how to best describe it; its other
features don't really lend themselves to a short one line description.

I see two options:

1. Change "Shift movement mark region" to "CUA Mode (without
   C-x/C-c/C-v)" with tooltip "Enable CUA Mode without setting
   C-x/C-c/C-v keys".  Perhaps we could even add on to the tooltip the
   explanatory text " (`cua-enable-cua-keys' is non-nil)".

2. If we can make the assumption that a user who has set
   `cua-enable-cua-keys' at least vaguely knows what they are doing,
   perhaps we could get away with just not doing anything special in
   that case.  In that case, we can get rid of the special handling and
   just show the default menu entry under all circumstances.

WDYT?  Any other ideas?

Message #26 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 11:05:33 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 21:17:42 +0000
> Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> We should probably replace "Shift movement mark region" with something
> else.  But it's not clear to me how to best describe it; its other
> features don't really lend themselves to a short one line description.
> 
> I see two options:
> 
> 1. Change "Shift movement mark region" to "CUA Mode (without
>    C-x/C-c/C-v)" with tooltip "Enable CUA Mode without setting
>    C-x/C-c/C-v keys".  Perhaps we could even add on to the tooltip the
>    explanatory text " (`cua-enable-cua-keys' is non-nil)".
> 
> 2. If we can make the assumption that a user who has set
>    `cua-enable-cua-keys' at least vaguely knows what they are doing,
>    perhaps we could get away with just not doing anything special in
>    that case.  In that case, we can get rid of the special handling and
>    just show the default menu entry under all circumstances.
> 
> WDYT?  Any other ideas?

I think we should do 1, but how do we name that item? what does CUA
mode do nowadays when CUA keys are disabled?

Message #29 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 18:05:18 -0700

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> 1. Change "Shift movement mark region" to "CUA Mode (without
>>    C-x/C-c/C-v)" with tooltip "Enable CUA Mode without setting
>>    C-x/C-c/C-v keys".  Perhaps we could even add on to the tooltip the
>>    explanatory text " (`cua-enable-cua-keys' is non-nil)".
>
> I think we should do 1, but how do we name that item? what does CUA
> mode do nowadays when CUA keys are disabled?

It has cua-set-rectangle-mark, other than that it only seems to make
some relatively minor adjustments to behavior.

  `cua-mode' Minor Mode Bindings:
  key             binding
  ---             -------

  C-S-SPC		cua-toggle-global-mark
  <C-return>	cua-set-rectangle-mark
  <remap>		Prefix Command

  <remap> <clipboard-yank>	cua-paste
  <remap> <exchange-point-and-mark>
  				cua-exchange-point-and-mark
  <remap> <scroll-down>		cua-scroll-down
  <remap> <scroll-down-command>	cua-scroll-down
  <remap> <scroll-up>		cua-scroll-up
  <remap> <scroll-up-command>	cua-scroll-up
  <remap> <set-mark-command>	cua-set-mark
  <remap> <x-clipboard-yank>	cua-paste
  <remap> <yank>			cua-paste
  <remap> <yank-pop>		cua-paste-pop

So I'm not sure how to summarize this.

My proposal is to name the menu item "CUA Mode (without C-x/C-c/C-v)"
and the tooltip "Enable CUA Mode without setting C-x/C-c/C-v keys".  Not
sure that the proposal is very good, but it's what I can think of.  At
the very least it's better than the incorrect text we have now.

Message #32 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 16:21:26 +0200

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 18:05:18 -0700
> Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> My proposal is to name the menu item "CUA Mode (without C-x/C-c/C-v)"
> and the tooltip "Enable CUA Mode without setting C-x/C-c/C-v keys".

Sounds good (though I would use "without rebinding" instead of
"setting").

Message #35 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 15:01:08 +0000

close 43322 28.1
thanks

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> My proposal is to name the menu item "CUA Mode (without C-x/C-c/C-v)"
>> and the tooltip "Enable CUA Mode without setting C-x/C-c/C-v keys".
>
> Sounds good (though I would use "without rebinding" instead of
> "setting").

Fixed on master.  Thanks.

Message #40 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 09:51:13 -0700 (PDT)

> > My proposal is to name the menu item "CUA Mode (without C-x/C-c/C-v)"
> > and the tooltip "Enable CUA Mode without setting C-x/C-c/C-v keys".
> 
> Sounds good (though I would use "without rebinding" instead of
> "setting").

Sorry, haven't followed this thread.

But just seeing that (out of context), I wonder
what is meant by it.  Isn't there a better way to
describe/name whatever behavior is meant by CUA
without C-x/C-c/C-v?  Those keys are what most
people think of when they think of CUA, no?

How about some positive description, instead of
this?  This seems a little like taking a walk
without walking.

Message #43 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: stefan <at> marxist.se, 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 19:09:10 +0200

> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 09:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> How about some positive description, instead of
> this?

Feel free to suggest one.  We tried (in the thread you didn't follow).

Message #46 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: stefan <at> marxist.se, 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 10:54:43 -0700 (PDT)

> > How about some positive description, instead of
> > this?
> 
> Feel free to suggest one.  We tried (in the thread you didn't follow).

If I knew CUA mode, and in particular what it is
minus those keys, I would.  Sorry, I don't.

If you've already tried and failed, so be it.
I guess the conclusion is that users of this
will know well enough what is meant by it, and
people who can't guess won't need to know...

Message #49 received at 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 43322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#43322: Confusing menu entry for cua-mode
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 11:15:16 -0700

Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:

> If you've already tried and failed, so be it.

Yes, we couldn't find a better summary, unfortunately.

Hopefully someone with more knowledge of CUA Mode will revisit and
improve this in the future.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.