[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Keybinding nit

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Keybinding nit
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 09:43:00 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

"Jan D." <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup skrev:
>> Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>>>     C-x 4 0 and C-x 5 0 are not at all symmetric, and C-x 4 0 is not
>>>     really intuitive.
>>>     Maybe one should rather have C-x 4 k and C-x 5 k for killing both
>>>     buffer and window/frame?
>>> Since C-x k reads a buffer name, I would expect C-x 4 k to
>>> read a buffer name also.
>> Well, I wouldn't (there are quite a few keybindings where "k" just
>> kills something).  And since neither C-x 0 nor C-x 5 0 kills a buffer,
>> I would not expect C-x 4 0 to do it, either.
>> It all boils down to what feels more natural and expected.  Of course
>> that is a matter of personal taste, and I like to think my taste is
>> not too far out here.  Other opinions?
> I think changing C-x 4 0 to just kill the window and adding C-x 4 k to kill
> buffer and window makes sense.
> But I have a question for C-x 5 k.  If you have more than one window
> showing different buffers in the frame, shall it kill all the
> buffers, or prompt for the one to kill?  I'd assume the latter.  The
> prompt could be skipped if there is just one buffer shown in that
> frame.

Good catch.  I'd just kill the selected window of the frame.

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]