Re: Suggestions for mode-line-format changes

[Miles Bader]

Michael Kifer <address@hidden> writes:
> Somebody>     [ediff's user interface seems generally pretty bad; I
> Somebody>     like the functionality, but never use it because it
> Somebody>     drives me nuts every time I try]
> 
> I am open to suggestions, but I don't have much time to make major changes.

I don't think anybody expects you to, certainly not without a real plan,
and hopefully anyone who really wants a change would do the work.

Anyway, though I don't like ediff's UI, it's not entirely clear to me
what a better UI would look like; perhaps discussion could turn up
some ideas.

I think my main problem with ediff is that it seems way too stateful --
it sets up an `ediff session' and puts up a special `control frame' (or
window), and generally seems very heavyweight.  I guess many people like
this (it's sort of like many dedicated GUI diff programs), but I don't;
it's very un-emacsy.  When I see all that state, I worry what happens if
I forget that I'm ediffing and delete a buffer or change a buffer, &c.
Maybe this worry is unwarranted, but I think it's kind of natural given
the general style of the ediff UI.

Compared to other programs, emacs gives the user much more freedom over
the configuration of windows, etc., and the ability to freely switch to
other tasks, so very stateful UIs often cause problems.

[The same `stateful' complaint could be made about e.g. Gnus, but I find
that when I want to use ediff, I also want to mess with CVS, visit other
source files, etc., and generally mess up the nice window configuration
ediff set up; this doesn't generally seem to happen with Gnus.]

I'd prefer that _all_ ediff state be contained within the two buffers
being diffed; if I kill them both, poof, no more ediff state (if I kill
only one, who knows, but presumably an error when you try to perform an
ediff operation).  [Maybe this is the case already, and I'm being fooled
by the appearance of the UI; what happens when you try two simulaneous
ediff sessions, for instance?]

This of course means that something has to be done about ediff commands;
I'd be happy with a simple command-mode vs. edit-mode toggle (look at
`diff-mode' for a particularly elegant implementation, BTW -- it puts
all the special single-letter command shortcuts on a minor-mode keymap
enabled by `buffer-read-only', so when the file's editable, you can edit
it, and you can just do toggle-read-only to get the convenient shortcut
commands).

Anyway, that's my take.

> PS. On the other hand, I receive tons of email attesting to the contrary.

Well, I think there's no doubt that ediff contains some great
functionality.

-Miles
-- 
`...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive
 that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products
 less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.'  [The Economist]