From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/37619
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: message-tab is broken
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 15:30:22 -0700
Message-ID: <2n66byi3r5.fsf@piglet.jia.vnet>
References: <mux1ymmc2er.fsf@uzeb.lrde.epita.fr>
	<vafofpqhj5g.fsf@INBOX.auto.gnus.tok.lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
	<muxvgjypy15.fsf@uzeb.lrde.epita.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035173000 14779 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 04:03:20 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 04:03:20 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <zsh@cs.rochester.edu>
Return-Path: <zsh@cs.rochester.edu>
Original-Received: (qmail 6447 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 22:33:13 -0000
Original-Received: from unknown (HELO zsh.2y.net) (131.241.79.80)
  by gnus.org with SMTP; 8 Aug 2001 22:33:13 -0000
Original-Received: (from zsh@localhost)
	by zsh.2y.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) id f78MUNq12777;
	Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:30:23 -0700
Original-To: ding@gnus.org
X-Attribution: ZSH
X-Face: 'IF:e51ib'Qbl^(}l^&4-J`'P!@[4~O|&k#:@Gld#b/]oMq&`&FVY._3+b`mzp~Jeve~/#/
 ERD!OTe<86UhyN=l`mrPY)M7_}`Ktt\K+58Z!hu7>qU,i.N7TotU[FYE(f1;}`g2xj!u*l`^&=Q!g{
 *q|<EDbQtg9{wfQuI,#r#{'A,\!95my:/,]"s,O4nzqxNL.}WrHA>ddto|nkt"$r,K$[)"|6,elPH=
 GJ6Q
In-Reply-To: <muxvgjypy15.fsf@uzeb.lrde.epita.fr> (Didier Verna's message of
 "Wed, 08 Aug 2001 13:54:30 +0200")
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/21.0.105
Original-Lines: 25
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:37619
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:37619

Didier Verna <didier@lrde.epita.fr> writes:

> Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) wrote:
>
>> Didier Verna <didier@lrde.epita.fr> writes:
>>
>>> 	The function has been (gratuitously ?) changed to call
>>> `indent-line-function ' instead of `tab-to-tab-stop'. As a
>>> consequence, hitting tab in the message body doesn't insert the
>>> expected tabulation because what's really done is
>>> `indent-to-left-margin'.
>>> 
>>> Why has this change been made ? Are there any objections if I change
>>> it back ?
>>
>> Why not change indent-line-function to indent-relative-maybe, for
>> example?  Or to tab-to-tab-stop, if you like.
>
> 	The problem with the `relative' family is that if the previous non
> blank line is not indented, you wouldn't get the tab. Maybe
> `indent-for-tab-command' would be the best choice ?

I've bind it to indent-relative, to which TAB is bound in text mode.

ShengHuo