[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: Binding M-n and M-p to forward-paragraph and backward-paragraphresp

From: Davis Herring
Subject: RE: Binding M-n and M-p to forward-paragraph and backward-paragraphrespectively
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 14:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.8-5.el5_4.10.lanl3

> The last go-round about binding some (function) key by default clearly
> demonstrated this: The discussion had not even finished, and no
> decision had yet been reached, before some were sending in posts
> that indicated that they understood that the key was _reserved_ and
> should not be changed by users or 3rd-party libraries.

Are you talking about the Alt-F4 (or M-f4) discussion?  If so, that was
heavily influenced by issues of whether Emacs should respect window system
conventions (and if so, which systems), and whether Emacs should attempt
to be just like every other program (for newbies' sake) but still somehow
better, and whether there was a difference between unbound and
specifically turned off, and how many layers of indirection to provide in
keymap customization, etc.  It's a very poor example for the issue of
adding non-famous keys to the default global map.  (It is, however, a very
good example of how contentious any tampering with that global map is.)

Of course, if that's not the one you meant, never mind.


This product is sold by volume, not by mass.  If it appears too dense or
too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during

reply via email to

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