[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove
From: |
Daniel Colascione |
Subject: |
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Jun 2024 09:51:41 -0400 |
User-agent: |
K-9 Mail for Android |
On June 26, 2024 9:22:10 AM EDT, Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> wrote:
>Hello, Daniel.
>
>On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 07:44:19 -0400, Daniel Colascione wrote:
>
>
>> On June 26, 2024 7:23:38 AM EDT, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>> >> From: Jeremy Bryant <jb@jeremybryant.net>
>> >> Cc: Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>, dancol@dancol.org, acm@muc.de,
>> >> stefankangas@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> >> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 22:26:47 +0100
>
>> >> 1.
>> >> I also find that C-x 4 is indeed logical, which makes it easier to
>> >> remember
>
>> >> 2.
>> >> C-x 4 .. works on the terminal/console. This is important for
>> >> preserving functionality of Emacs.
>
>> >I still hope that someone will tell what is exactly the request here,
>> >given that windmove-mode is on by default and its commands are
>> >autoloaded.
>
>> To be clear, my proposal is to bind C-x 4 <arrow> in the default
>> global keymap to the corresponding directional windmove commands and
>> to bind the shifted versions of these keys to the state swapping
>> versions of these movement commands. IOW, in emacs -Q, C-x 4 LEFT
>> should move left.
>
>That doesn't clear up all that much. The answers to "why?" are missing.
>I don't think there need to be such bindings in the default keymap.
>
>As Eli said, windmove is autoloaded, including its command
>windmove-default-keybindings. By default, this binds S-<up> etc., which
>strike me as better bindings than C-x 4 <up> etc. for anybody not using
>these bindings for anything else. C-x 4 <up> might be convenient for
>those on tty's whose keyboard layout lacks <modifier(s)>-<up>, but
>hardly on a GUI Emacs.
>
>Possibly, windmove-default-keybindings could be enhanced to allow a
>prefix key binding to be given as an alternative to a set of modifiers.
>Possibly.
>
>So, currently, windmove is easily available to anybody that wants it,
>and doesn't "waste" the key bindings of those who don't.
There is no "waste". We've gone over this at length. People who want to bind
these keys can bind them still. Nobody is hurt by default bindings being
present, and all the arguments I've seen against these bindings are also
arguments against having default bindings at all.
There's no need to augment the binding function with a new parameter. Anyone
who can use the new parameter can just bind the keys directly. The point is
that out of the box Emacs should be useful and useable, that the lack of
default bindings for windmove makes it less so, and that there's little
downside to adding these bindings.
> Why is the
>current state unsatisfactory, and why do you want to make these new
>bindings?
Because it's useful to navigate windows positionally as well as temporally.
Other-window often has unpredictable effects and navigating with windmove DWIM.
>
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, (continued)
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Daniel Colascione, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Daniel Colascione, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Daniel Colascione, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Hovav Shacham, 2024/06/28
- RE: [External] : Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Drew Adams, 2024/06/28
- Re: [External] : Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/06/29
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Alan Mackenzie, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove,
Daniel Colascione <=
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Po Lu, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Daniel Colascione, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Po Lu, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Alan Mackenzie, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Colin Baxter, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Joel Reicher, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/06/26
- Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Alan Mackenzie, 2024/06/26
- RE: [External] : Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Drew Adams, 2024/06/26