Emacs next-line Changed Behavior?

I just made a macro to do some quick-n-dirty editing and noticed that c-n, or next-line, acts funny. If the line is long and wraps, it goes to the next visual line, not the actual next line of text (as delimited with a newline). Inconsistently, c-e, or move-end-of-line, still goes to the end of the actual line, not to just before it wraps (moves to the newline). This is with emacs 23.0.60.1, which isn't an official release, so maybe that's just what I get for being bleeding edge. Anyway, it was kind of weird and I wanted to document it. I like the old behavior of c-n better, but the c-e thing allowed my macro to still be possible.

Some good that came of this was that markhepburn noticed this too, and google picked it up, and now I can see all the other cool emacs discoveries he has posted in his twitter feed.

Comments

Bob Erb said…
(visual-line-mode nil)

Because visual-line-mode is yucky and making it the new default is bad.
March 21, 2009 at 8:41 AM
Gord Wait said…
Agreed, I wondered why my keyboard macros started going south.
Dumb move emacs people. I've been using emacs since the 80's - partially BECAUSE it doesn't get it's UI rearranged every release!

Was there some sort of notice that I clicked through warning me of this change?
May 11, 2010 at 10:02 AM
Anonymous said…
This is how to have it act the old, good way, moving by logical lines: Put this in your ~/.xemacs/custom.el :
(setq line-move-visual 'nil)
November 5, 2010 at 1:00 AM
Friend of a Friend said…
Thank you thank you thank for the .emacs file fix!
April 5, 2013 at 12:51 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SystemVerilog Fork Disable "Gotchas"

This is a long post with a lot of SystemVerilog code. The purpose of this entry is to hopefully save you from beating your head against the wall trying to figure out some of the subtleties of SystemVerilog processes (basically, threads). Subtleties like these are commonly referred to in the industry as "Gotchas" which makes them sound so playful and fun, but they really aren't either. I encourage you to run these examples with your simulator (if you have access to one) so that a) you can see the results first hand and better internalize what's going on, and b) you can tell me in the comments if this code works fine for you and I'll know I should go complain to my simulator vendor. OK, I'll start with a warm-up that everyone who writes any Verilog or SystemVerilog at all should be aware of, tasks are static by default. If you do this: module top; task do_stuff ( int wait_time); #wait_time $display ( "waited %0d, then did stuff" , wa
Read more

'git revert' Is Not Equivalent To 'svn revert'

I just learned that if you have some changes in your working tree that you want to get rid of, you don't type 'git revert' like you might guess. No, that's what cvs, subversion, mercurial, and bazaar (to name a few) use revert to mean, but not git. With git, revert is used to undo actual commits. Thankfully, you can undo your revert with another 'git revert', I just learned. So let me repeat to be clear, if you have changes to your working files that you want to abandon, DO NOT do this: git revert HEAD That will undo your last commit. Do this instead: git reset --hard HEAD I'm glad I have that straightened out now. I'm wondering if /etc was really a good place for me to start out playing with git. UPDATE: Nearly two years later and I'm still getting comments on this. I'm glad I've been able to help people out this way. The discussion in the comments is good, and one thing I'd like to point out is that I now always use
Read more

Put /etc Under Revision Control (with git)

UPDATE : There is a much easier way now : sudo aptitude install etckeeper There, now etc is under revision control and changes are automatically committed with a helpful message after you install new packages. Thanks for the tip, Marcelo! Read on for the original blog entry. --- I put my /etc directory under revision control. I used git. It's awesome. Not that I think I'm going to wholesale copy my /etc from one machine to another, nor because I'm going to branch my /etc directory and spend weeks developing some cool new feature (whatever that would look like...) and then merge it back into the main branch. No, it's mostly because I like the idea of having the big "undo" option that having things under revision control provides. Having to commit changes and write check-in comments when I make changes helps me stay more organized too. It's never good when I go in willy-nilly to make a "quick change" to some configuration file. I r
Read more