Re: [PATCH] New tab-bar-detach-tab command

[Adam Porter]

Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net> writes:

>>> Indeed, the key doesn't need to be the first letter of the command name.
>>> For example, since 'C-x t d' was already bound to 'dired-other-tab',
>>> for 'tab-duplicate' I added 'C-x t n' with the mnemonic of "new".
>>>
>>> But a month ago a new command 'clone-frame' was added with the
>>> keybinding 'C-x 5 c'.  So now we have two similar commands with
>>> different keys: 'c' - clone frame, and 'n' - duplicate tab.
>>>
>>> Or maybe these commands are quite different?  I tried 'clone-frame',
>>> but it neither clones nor duplicates the frame - it creates
>>> a completely new window configuration on the new frame.
>>
>> I suppose a `tab-clone' command would be more concise than
>> `tab-duplicate', and it would also fit with other commands like
>> `clone-buffer' (I don't see any other commands in my Emacs with
>> "duplicate" in the name).  Then the binding could be "C-x t c".
>
> The command was named "duplicate" because web browsers
> provide the menu item "Duplicate tab".

Of course, that makes sense.  But since "clone" seems to already be a
term used in Emacs for this sort of thing, maybe we should consider
using it, instead.  For example, `clone-buffer' and `clone-process' both
"Create a twin copy of...".  That the new `clone-frame' command only
"Make[s] a new frame with the same parameters as FRAME" and doesn't
include its window configuration seems like an anomaly (maybe that
should be changed, too, for consistency?).

> Also since 'clone-frame' doesn't duplicate the frame,
> we could add a new command 'duplicate-frame' as well.

Maybe so, but I wonder if it would be better to consistently use "clone"
to mean "Create a twin copy of...", and use "duplicate" to mean
something like what the `clone-frame' command currently does,
i.e. create a copy that shares some attributes but not all.  In that
case, the current `clone-frame' command could be renamed to
`duplicate-frame', and `duplicate-tab' could be renamed to `clone-tab'.

Maybe these details are too subtle to matter, but on the other hand, it
would seem more consistent with existing Emacs jargon if if worked that
way.