[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3

From: Juri Linkov
Subject: Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:32:30 +0300
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)

> When you copy a file in Dired, you don't think in terms of "splitting" the 
> file.
> Yes, copying a window means that some other window will be smaller, and in 
> that
> sense "split" has some mileage.  But the confusion around "splitting" isn't
> worth it, and "copy" lets you know that the new window is not just new, it's a
> copy of the selected window (same buffer).

I have no opinion about renaming `split-window' to something else.
Since the original problem was not about renaming the function name
prefix `split-window-', but about the ambiguity of the old function
name suffixes `-horizontally' and `-vertically' and ungrammatical new
suffixes `-above-each-other' and `-side-by-side', it should be noted that
for consistency with the current definition of `split-window'
and its `SIDE' argument, the equivalent names are:

  (split-window nil nil 'below)   <=>   (split-window-below)
  (split-window nil nil 'above)   <=>   (split-window-above)
  (split-window nil nil 'right)   <=>   (split-window-right)
  (split-window nil nil 'left)    <=>   (split-window-left)

reply via email to

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