Re: dired-jump keybinding and autoload

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Lennart Borgman writes:

 > That C-x today happens to be a bad choice (because of CUA) is another
 > thing. I definitively does not get better if 3rd party libraries
 > starts using it too.

You're totally missing your own point.  It is precisely CUA that makes
C-x an excellent choice of prefix for new bindings.

CUA currently conflicts with all C-x bindings, and this is a
non-trivial problem to solve because of Emacs history.  But you are
absolutely, completely, 100.0% wrong.  Adding new C-x bindings does
not make this problem worse.  If and when it is (really) solved, it
will need to be solved for all C-x bindings in one fell swoop, and
that solution will be applicable to any future C-x bindings, which
will be less likely to conflict with existing C-x bindings because
they will be chosen not to conflict.

Why make that solution harder by spreading alternate prefix keys all
over the map (literally)?