[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: `C-b' is backward-char, `left' is left-char - why?

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: `C-b' is backward-char, `left' is left-char - why?
Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 11:26:59 +0300

> From: "Drew Adams" <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 18:54:51 -0700
> Cc: address@hidden
> My point was to _ask_ whether changing these bindings globally is
> necessary.  I simply asked whether there wasn't some way to avoid
> changing them.  There's been a lot of heat, but not much in the way
> of an explanation.

Since the blame for this change is mine and mine alone (I did discuss
it with Stefan in private email, but only after making that change),
the only real explanation is what I already wrote in an earlier
message: I didn't find a better solution.

I happen to be happy with that solution, but I'm ready to hear
suggestions for better ones.

> How the implementation would move between having these new bindings in place 
> for
> bidi and not making them when bidi is disabled is not something I would try to
> answer.  I asked whether it was possible.

In some complicated and inelegant way, sure.  But we here happen to
dislike complicated and inelegant ways when less complicated and more
elegant ones are available that have no significant disadvantages.

reply via email to

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