[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: Rethinking count-words-region

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: Rethinking count-words-region
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 14:33:14 -0700

> A good way to make more available keybindings is to turn an 
> existing key into the key prefix like:
> `M-= ='   count-stats
> `M-= w'   count-words
> `M-= l'   count-lines
> `M-= c'   count-chars
> `M-= r w'   count-region-words
> `M-= r l'   count-region-lines
> `M-= r c'   count-region-chars

Not _that_ key (`M-='), anyway.
Which part of this did you not understand:

d> This is a waste of:
d> (a) a good, repeatable chord (just hold it down),
d> (b) one that is also usable in a terminal (via `ESC ='), and
d> (c) one that is mnemonic for lots of things that involve _equality_
d>     or _comparison_.  `=' is not mnemonic for _counting_ anything.

E.g., I personally use `C-=' as a prefix key, so I agree with you about the
value of that.  But I use it for commands that _compare_ something:

C-= w           compare-windows
C-= d           diff
C-= f           ediff-files
C-= e           ediff-files
C-= b           ediff-buffers

(And yes, I do feel wasteful that I use a repeatable key, `C-=', for commands
that do not take advantage of its repeatability.  But anyway, those are my own
bindings, not default bindings for Emacs.)

Similarly, M-= would be something to use for a set of commands that compare
things or that otherwise involve equality.  But certainly not for commands that

FWIW, I'm not against a command that counts several different things at once.  I
don't think it deserves/needs a default key binding, however - users can bind it
if they wish.

And I certainly don't think that we need to waste multiple key sequences, by
default, for various counting commands.  (Seven key sequences!?  Even on a
prefix key that's a waste.)

It's not just because we _can_ bind some key that we should or we have to.  Far
from it.  Leave `M-=' for a good future use.  Leave it for users, for now.

Just one opinion, of course.

reply via email to

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