Re: C-x 8 shorthands for ≤ and ≥

[Werner LEMBERG]

>>>   ("_<" . [?≤])
>>>   ("_>" . [?≥])
>>> Can the bindings be changed to these:
>>>   ("<=" . [?≤])
>>>   (">=" . [?≥])
> 
> FWIW, I agree.

Me too.

>> ">" is already bound to »
>> "<" is already boudn to «
> 
> ">>" and "<<" would seem to be better choices.

Yep.  Additionally, this is already used in the latin-1 input method.

> The shorter `C-x <' used so far made sense when we restricted C-x 8
> to something like Latin-1, but if we want to extend coverage, I
> don't think we can afford such short bindings.

It probably makes sense to compare the bindings with other latin-X
methods, probably finding some compromises where necessary.


    Werner