emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?


From: Stefan Monnier
Subject: Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:45:31 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux)

> that's an interesting perspective.  Am surprized that you feel tty
> users would find C-z z significantly harder than just C-z as the key
> to suspend Emacs.

I assume tty users have "C-z to suspend" hardwired in their fingers and
would be quite surprised if any application decides to use another
binding for it.


        Stefan


> Stefan Monnier writes:
>  > > Since keybindings are  a strong emotional issue, I was hoping to
>  > > divide and conquer the problem, i.e. first free up a new prefix key,
>  > > then experiment  by putting a set of related commands on that key --
>  > > rather than chasing our tails with arguments over which key to start 
> with.
>  > 
>  > I think `C-z` is fair game in GUI but freeing it up for other uses in tty
>  > mode will be a very hard sell.  This leaves it as "free for GUI-only
>  > bindings" which makes it much less useful than a true "free prefix keymap".
>  > 
>  > 
>  >         Stefan
>  > 
>  > 
>  > > Stefan Monnier writes:
>  > >  > > 1. C-z as a prefix --- at present c-z   runs suspend-frame under X, 
> and
>  > >  > >    suspends Emacs on the console.
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > Then again, `C-z` is a standard binding for `undo`.  ;-)
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > >    Perhaps turn C-z into a new prefix key, and bind the above 
> commands
>  > >  > >    to C-z z -- that gives us a whole new keymap to play with for the
>  > >  > >    future.
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > It's true that there's some logic to use C-z, C-x, and C-c for 
> standard
>  > >  > prefix keys.  Yet, I think this can only make sense if we have a clear
>  > >  > idea of what kinds of bindings we'd put into this prefix.
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > >    2. F2 is currently taken up by 2c (2column support) and perhaps 
> it's
>  > >  > >       time to recover that key, I suspect 2c is not as heavily used 
> to
>  > >  > >       justify a common key like F2, and it would still have C-x 6
>  > >  > >       dedicated to it if we take F2 away from it.
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > I agree that the binding of `f2` to `2C-command` can be dropped.
>  > >  > Not sure what to bind it to instead, OTOH.
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > 
>  > >  >         Stefan
>  > >
>  > > -- 
>  > > ♉Id: kg:/m/0285kf1  🦮♉
>
> -- 
> ♉Id: kg:/m/0285kf1  🦮♉




reply via email to

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