[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1
From: |
Florian v. Savigny |
Subject: |
Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1 |
Date: |
Mon, 05 Sep 2016 00:53:47 +0200 |
> Yes. Most commands use the argument as a repeat count, so having it
> default to one makes perfect sense.
Ahh! You mean, like,
C-u 80 -
conveniently draws a line across the screen. Yes, that makes it
understandable indeed. Sounds like the prefix argument was more or
less conceived as a repeat count.
Thanks a lot, Eli!
Florian
--
Florian von Savigny
Melanchthonstr. 41
33615 Bielefeld
- Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1, (continued)
- RE: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1, Drew Adams, 2016/09/08
- Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1, Andreas Röhler, 2016/09/06
- RE: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1, Drew Adams, 2016/09/05
- Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1, Florian v. Savigny, 2016/09/05
- RE: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1, Drew Adams, 2016/09/05
- Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1, B.V. Raghav, 2016/09/05
Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1,
Florian v. Savigny <=
Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2016/09/15