Re: Tex-mode binding of C-return

[Stefan Monnier]

>>> C-return is such a "good command", analogue to C-SPC for the
>>> normal mark.
>> I don't find C-return a particularly good choice (especially since it
>> doesn't work on ttys).  
> Neither does S-return...

Indeed, so it's not a good choice either.

> Does C-space work on ttys?

Yes and no: it typically isn't recognized as C-SPC but as C-@ (aka ASCII
NUL).  Luckily (well it's actually done on purpose) C-@ has the
same binding, so it does DTRT.

In contrast on most tty C-return just sends a RET and we can't put that
special binding on RET as well.

I'm not saying C-return can't be used, but it would be good to also find
a key that works on ttys (just like we have undo bound to C-x u for "works
everywhere" as well as to C-_ and C-/ for more convenient alternatives
that don't always work).  Maybe we could just use C-x r (except it would
hide the register commands ;-( ).

>> Is the idea that to kill a rectangle you could do
>> C-RET C-SPC .... M-w

> Just do:
>      C-RET ... M-w 

Hmmm... OK.  I was thinking it would be good to make it work like a general
prefix command so you could also do C-return M-C-SPC, but after thinking
about it, I see it's not that important as long as M-C-SPC C-return works
as well.

>> or equivalently
>> 
>> C-SPC ... C-RET ... M-w

> That works, yes, changing the normal mark to
> a rectangle mark.

Good.  I assume it only works if you use transient-mark-mode, otherwise it
has no way to know whether you're "in the middle of marking" or not.

> I'm suggesting to use C-return instead of S-return to toggle the
> rectangle mark, just like C-space toggles the normal mark.

Fine with me, C-return is no worse than S-return.


        Stefan