Re: Suggestions for mode-line-format changes

[Miles Bader]

Michael Kifer <address@hidden> writes:
> In this regard, I think you might not have understood what I said about a
> bad suggestion in your previous message.

No, I understood what you meant.

> The same buffer can be involved in different ediff sessions.  I
> consider this essential.  You can't just start typing commands into a
> buffer being diffed without first indicating which session the buffer
> is involved in is current.

Sure, it's true that the current UI might be best for very complex
situations like that -- but frankly, for me at least, the default is
_very simple_ situations, where it _is_ quite reasonable to have a
unique mapping of text-buffer->ediff-session.

I'd be happy if ediff could give me my preferred UI most of the time,
but require me switch to the complex UI for those (very, very, rare)
circumstances when I need to.

> The UI by which you indicate this is not present in ediff, but can be
> added, because each buffer already knows the set of sessions it is in.

Ok.  If I get around too it, I'll see if I can add enough features to
ediff to allow it to use an interface like I've described.

> It is already contained in one place -- the control buffer.  It is
> possible to make this buffer invisible as I indicated above and
> instead implement a mechanism by which you indicate the current
> control session.

I'd like it so that command in one of the source buffers simply mapped
to the control buffer, which would stay hidden (even when `in use').

> But I think this is a bad idea. This is how emerge works, and I don't
> like its interface.

That's OK; we're even, I guess... :-)

-Miles
-- 
Run away!  Run away!