From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id yIbwKZEQdF/DawAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:58:57 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id YGrYJZEQdF/MQAAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:58:57 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 395569401BC for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:58:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:52890 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kNUCc-0001SU-Qh for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 00:58:54 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41638) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kNUBq-0001PW-Hg for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 00:58:06 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x433.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::433]:40398) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kNUBo-0002Hn-1y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 00:58:06 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-x433.google.com with SMTP id x123so327715pfc.7 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 21:58:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :date:mime-version; bh=t6OY5wmI/N3Hi4RDjSVqMWyp6dprR934DfvCoFy1XDs=; b=bnk95biDYDK95/8+8o6UUKr6mIbe2FKC+T8TufMfT0WTIgV/9FBmg+CSjM7OlKChDK wnshtEahoo94CqJPXxhGBA/EqepqS71sAmRNg1sEXg1sOjf9ctKIfIhFrk03SFgarzNy tnyLn/QZactRTT0M71pUWaiSGqpq7k/L+BLtsKCoOlkwGhWFN93cKoimdoM3yQD5z4oO wjAxM2IGdMU2aSvX+++QgQm/FkMmhs9999GrK1S3TW6yrsZXtLcsbtqAWrDlo73fteZH xpngs8bvPiw6P83GGQtkN51exweTBtpuXEqXJAk88U7zHdtM+GKi2Sn+b20C7Kq0WZWB c9nw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject :in-reply-to:message-id:date:mime-version; bh=t6OY5wmI/N3Hi4RDjSVqMWyp6dprR934DfvCoFy1XDs=; b=Zl6WKeHFfZXJPDVsdZoXb2anythxczuoK60mv07Gg6u5AN2sN0EjtRwyILIwn8I6qy eARvEKHbZdOyY+LT6H22vN+ZXO7OCaau2l78PKhw5IVu7WOSE/O7nu8XQm71qxeRMVS0 XVEjBFEp9OaBY4qxatntDzWbr2y0OoLO33XiBTVUeb9k1dHZYeSxMTT1OdFtGX5Zz7MB WJmaq/k/LRcx1a15M8l87P6SbzG0Y0cSLPLkCgD3AZ0XXrVlhOeS2E3lOPqwfTujvInv mCfUJbYD0dTgcZ5uWdk1IHpW9riU4t+8LAVeOgqAC03ksqZ6PQk0vhhgtOG7sXmByOfU BU3w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531LKVNoRI+sL6CKCo4CidJTUHuJS7FDNTAYsqo5B+hsq+R5xyai QfMwre2uiardnSAt42L8yVCSNYgn6ec= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxbexzSORdKJSdPlCZVaGA+dZCDTO+iIZR/SuTcdUoF3Cfhoi46kSPFMZhkV5Ia4hWiSsHEfA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:de56:: with SMTP id y22mr805855pgi.166.1601441881988; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 21:58:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (180-150-91-8.b4965b.per.nbn.aussiebb.net. [180.150.91.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f18sm552841pfe.153.2020.09.29.21.58.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 21:58:01 -0700 (PDT) References: <87sglwoata.fsf@iki.fi> <87imbvrjud.fsf@kyleam.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.13; emacs 27.1 From: TEC To: Kyle Meyer Subject: Re: PATCH: Display point of code block point when confirming evaluation In-reply-to: <87imbvrjud.fsf@kyleam.com> Message-ID: <878scrhne1.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:57:58 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::433; envelope-from=tecosaur@gmail.com; helo=mail-pf1-x433.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Jarmo Hurri , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=bnk95biD; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.71 X-TUID: 5KxqNvyQ+49C Kyle Meyer writes: > That sounds reasonable to me, and the change looks fine to me. > My only > thought is that perhaps the line number would be friendlier to > report, > but I don't feel strongly about that. +1 for line numbers Assuming the current format is something like: "Do you want to eval block at y/n:" I'd be in favour of: "Do you want to eval block at (line ) y/n:" or similar. All the best, Timothy.