[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?
From: |
T.V Raman |
Subject: |
Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings? |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Sep 2020 09:58:34 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Almost as courageous as Lars' request to change line-length limits
(hopefully not quite as controversial)
Perhaps it's time we opened up some additional keymaps so that we can
experiment with keybindings without causing too much trouble for
long-term users.
Proposal:
1. C-z as a prefix --- at present c-z runs suspend-frame under X, and
suspends Emacs on the console.
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.
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-x6
dedicated to it if we take F2 away from it.
Thibaut Verron <thibaut.verron@gmail.com> writes:
> Le mar. 29 sept. 2020 ?? 23:58, Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> a ??crit :
>>
>> On 27.09.2020 12:31, Thibaut Verron wrote:
>> > For the REPL example, I guess it should be possible to split basic
>> > functionality into some well-defined functions, and let packages
>> > assign those functions? Like a comint-create-process-function, a
>> > comint-send-region-function, a comint-send-buffer-function, etc.
>>
>> I applaud this initiative, but one of the steps would be to define
>> common bindings to use in all "inferior" (REPL) modes, and that is
>> likely to conflict with existing bindings.
>
> It doesn't have to be in the global-map, it could be a minor mode
> activated by those major-modes or users that want it.
> And the keymap doesn't even have to be populated by default, I guess.
>
> If python.el is refactored to use a new proc-send-buffer command, they
> can still bind C-c C-c to that in python-mode-map, but a user who
> prefers to use C-c C-b in all modes can bind C-c C-b in proc-mode-map.
>
> Minor clarification: I'm not talking about the process buffers
> themselves, but the normal edition buffers for the corresponding
> language. E.g. emacs-lisp buffers, not IELM.
>
--
Thanks,
--Raman
?7?4 Id: kg:/m/0285kf1 ?0?8
- Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, (continued)
Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, Dmitry Gutov, 2020/09/29
- Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, Thibaut Verron, 2020/09/30
- Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/09/30
- Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, T.V Raman, 2020/09/30
- Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, Robert Pluim, 2020/09/30
- Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/09/30
- Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, T.V Raman, 2020/09/30
- Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, Noam Postavsky, 2020/09/30
- Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, T.V Raman, 2020/09/30
- Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?, chad, 2020/09/30