On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 05:03:11PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 30/08/2016 à 16:55, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > OK I pushed at 03684ae0. I wonder if the misunderstanding comes back to > > what we agreed on before, which is that it is weird that both > > > > buffer-zoom-in 4 > > buffer-zoom-out 4 > > > > have the same behavior. > > No, it probably come from my laziness about reading your patch :)
Well it is rational. This trivial issue is not worth much time. Thank you for the time you spent on it. > > Perhaps we should change this so that > > > > buffer-zoom-in 4 > > buffer-zoom-out -4 > > > > have the same behavior instead. But I don't feel like working on that > > now. And the patch I committed at least makes things consistent given > > the current behavior. > > Yes the arguments should be changed one day, but I suspect that nobody uses > the lfuns with an argument anyway... I would say I'd put it on my TODO list but I already have enough things on there I probably won't do. Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
