On 9 January 2014 14:03, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:

On 09 Jan 2014, at 13:59, kilon alios <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:

> yes this lead to endless debate, but I think this is good because we see diffirent ways into looking into things. I have to admit till today I never expected that someone would be against confirm dialogs to such extend of wanting them to be removed completely, but I can see now that for people that dont make mistakes or they rather live with these mistakes would prefer a non confirmation approach. Its good to discuss these things because next time I will try to "fix" something I will try to do it in a way that pleases most people and not interrupting their workflow.
>
> And its endless because people prefer diffirent things, and thats ok. Opinions should be expressed and be respected. Opinions matter to make software better . Afterall software is made to please people by doing the things they want . No software of course is perfect. :)
>
> I completely respect Igor's opinion. And Igor its great you have worked on these things and thank you :) You should promote your work I think progress should be more carefully logged so we can all appreciate the work that goes inside pharo :)
>

A editor key combination that looses code because is does not support undo is *wrong*. Completely and utterly *wrong*.

Crippling the feature is *wrong*. Completely and utterly *wrong*.

As we all agreed , the proper fix to cmd-l problem is make it undoable.

An *improper* fix is put warnings everywhere. Warnings do not prevent from mistakes,

�they just do things worse at times.
That's all what wanted to say.

�

� � � � Marcus

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.