From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.. Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:01:22 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <20020827114256.AA62.LEKTU@terra.es> References: <20020827104600.AA5C.LEKTU@terra.es> <5x1y8ktww7.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1030442551 28134 127.0.0.1 (27 Aug 2002 10:02:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 10:02:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Stefan Monnier" , "D. Goel" , emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17jdB7-0007JV-00 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:02:29 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17jdgN-0007f6-00 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:34:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17jdCP-0003fY-00; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 06:03:49 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17jdAa-0003cB-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 06:01:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17jdAX-0003bz-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 06:01:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [62.22.27.141] (helo=mail.peoplecall.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17jdAX-0003bv-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 06:01:53 -0400 Original-Received: from [62.22.27.143] (jbarranquero.ofi.peoplecall.com [62.22.27.143]) by mail.peoplecall.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RA1LB16081; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:01:21 +0200 Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-Reply-To: <5x1y8ktww7.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.05.04 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:6977 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:6977 On 27 Aug 2002 12:32:24 +0200, storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) wrote: > I really don't understand why binding function keys by default is > worth making a fuzz about. > > f1, f2, and f10 are already bound, I don't see why binding f3 and f4 > should upset anyone (as it obviously does). Obviously, the F1..Fn space is much smaller than a control-whatever multikey binding. Yes, I feel strongly about anything using F keys. F1 is to all effects a "standard" for Help, but from F2 and F10 I have removed the default bindings, that I simply don't use. I like kmacro a lot, but if standard Emacs packages start to use the F-space, well, there's very little and I'm sure many other packages would benefit from using F keys (bs functions for cycling buffers, for example). IMHO, the decision about how to manage these keys is best left in user's hands. > There's nothing preventing a user (even a novice user) from changing > the default bindings, but what's wrong with providing default bindings > which makes emacs easier to use? Nothing, of course. But there are *lots* of things in Emacs that the user must access through several keystrokes and that would be easier if bound to an F-key. I certainly use list-buffers (bs-show, in fact, but that's irrelevant) a lot more than macros, so it is much much better for me to bind list-buffers to a single key that any macro function... Obviously YMMV. > I did that originally, but removed it since the new C-x C-k bindings > are better than the original bindings (which included M-f7, C-f8, S-f8 > etc). As all that wonderful functionality is available through C-x C-k, the fact is that you're reserving two F-keys basically to start recording a macro (inserting counters is useful, but secondary), to finish recording it and to recall it. The last use I can understand, but you don't record a macro that often. What's wrong with having a multikey binding? All that said, I'm not opposing in any way to using F3/F4 or F7/F8; is not that important an issue. I'm just venting my opinion that I feel vaguely "wrong" to steal the F-keys from the user. /L/e/k/t/u