Re: `*' interactive spec in some text-killing functions

[David Kastrup]

"Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <address@hidden> writes:

> Juanma Barranquero wrote:
>> On 6/28/07, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> But _why_ wouldn't it be "smart"?  The command _is_ executed, it has
>>> the normal effect (which may become relevant if the buffer-read-only
>>> state changes), and it does _absolutely_ no harm to the buffer
>>> contents or anything else.
>>
>> Neither does any harm to PgUp at the beginning of a buffer. What is
>> the message for? To alert me that I cannot go up? Well, my overwrite
>> message is to alert me that I cannot overwrite even if I just changed
>> to overwrite, and that I shouldn't expect most normal keys to act
>> differently just because I changed to overwrite.
>
>
> I have often wanted colored messages for different levels of
> seriousity. I think that might make it easier to decide in some
> situations like this.

I don't see that we have a situation.  We have a command that is
trivially executed without taking time or effort and has _no_ ill
consequences at all.  Toggling overwrite-mode is completely orthogonal
to the buffer being read-only, and it is displayed in the mode line
what effects it had.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing to warn about here.

"Warning: command completed successfully, but you would need to do
other things before you would notice its effect." is just nonsense.
You could show such a "warning" for millions of cases.

-- 
David Kastrup