winner.el vs. simple.el

winner.el vs. simple.el

[Juanma Barranquero]

There's a keybinding conflict between simple.el and winner.el. Nothing
earth-shaking, though.

winner-mode defines winner-undo and winner-redo in its minor-mode map as
C-x left and C-x right.

Since 2002-04-27, simple.el defines these keybindings on the global map
for prev-buffer, next-buffer (BTW, these aren't mentioned on etc/NEWS
even when they're user commands and highly useful).

There's no released Emacs with the (prev,next)-buffer bindings, so they
could be changed to C-x C-left, C-x C-right (almost as easy to type as
the current ones, and free AFAICS).

Changing winner.el is another possibility, although I'm hesitant to do
so because it's been around since 1997, at least, and claims to be
compatible with Emacs 19.X, 20.X, and various XEmacsen.

Do we want to do something about it?

                                                                Juanma

Re: winner.el vs. simple.el

[Alan Shutko]

Juanma Barranquero <jmbarranquero@wke.es> writes:

> There's no released Emacs with the (prev,next)-buffer bindings, so they
> could be changed to C-x C-left, C-x C-right (almost as easy to type as
> the current ones, and free AFAICS).

They can't be typed on terminals, though.  

-- 
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> - I am the rocks.

Re: winner.el vs. simple.el

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 10:42:18 -0500
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> wrote:

> They can't be typed on terminals, though.  

<bummer>

Well, it'd still be nice to find alternative keybindings for one of them.


                                                                Juanma

Re: winner.el vs. simple.el

[Kevin Rodgers]

Juanma Barranquero wrote:
 > Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> wrote:
 >>They can't be typed on terminals, though.
 >
 > <bummer>
 >
 > Well, it'd still be nice to find alternative keybindings for one of them.

I suggest moving the winner commands to C-c left and C-c right.

-- 
Kevin Rodgers

Re: winner.el vs. simple.el

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 12:09:44 -0600, Kevin Rodgers <ihs_4664@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I suggest moving the winner commands to C-c left and C-c right.

Seems sensible. They're mode-specific, after all.

What about compatibility?

                                                           /L/e/k/t/u

Re: winner.el vs. simple.el

[Juanma Barranquero]

> On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 12:09:44 -0600, Kevin Rodgers <ihs_4664@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
> I suggest moving the winner commands to C-c left and C-c right.

Ok, so options are:

 a) Do nothing. The compatibility issue should be mentioned on NEWS so
    old winner users know they must re-bind winner-(undo|redo), or
    buffer-(left|right).

 b) Assigning another keybindings for buffer-(left|right). Not a good
    idea because they are in general much more useful than winner-*.

 c) Changing winner-(undo|redo) to C-c (left|right).

 d) As c) but extending the current `winner-dont-bind-my-keys' boolean
    variable to a three-state with values like:

    nil   -> don't bind w-(u|r)
    t     -> bind w-(u|r) to C-c (l|r)
    'old  -> bind w-(u|r) to C-x (l|r)

 e) As c), with a new `winner-bind-incompatible-keys' (name irrelevant)
    defaulting to nil, so by default the binding is as now.

Preferences, anyone?


                                                           /L/e/k/t/u

Re: winner.el vs. simple.el

[Richard Stallman]

I think winner.el's bindings should be changed.

     c) Changing winner-(undo|redo) to C-c (left|right).

If people like those bindings, let's use them.

     d) As c) but extending the current `winner-dont-bind-my-keys' boolean
	variable to a three-state with values like:

I don't think this variable is worth its cost in complexity.
An incompatible change in winner.el is no big deal.

Re: winner.el vs. simple.el

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Mon, 03 May 2004 18:20:57 -0400, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> If people like those bindings, let's use them.

Ok, done.

I haven't mentioned the change in NEWS because there's no mention of
(prev|next)-buffer either.  Perhaps a paragraph like

  You can switch buffers easily with the new functions prev-buffer and
  next-buffer, bound by default to C-x <left> and C-x <right>. These keys
  were previously used by commands winner-undo and winner-redo from minor
  mode winner-mode, which have been moved to C-c <left> and C-c <right>
  respectively.

(with better wording) would be in order...

                                                           /L/e/k/t/u

Re: winner.el vs. simple.el

[Richard Stallman]

      You can switch buffers easily with the new functions prev-buffer and
      next-buffer, bound by default to C-x <left> and C-x <right>. These keys
      were previously used by commands winner-undo and winner-redo from minor
      mode winner-mode, which have been moved to C-c <left> and C-c <right>
      respectively.

Here's a clearer way to say it:

    Convenient commands to switch buffers in a cyclic order are
    C-x <left> (prev-buffer) and C-x <right> (next-buffer).

There is no need to mention winner here, since it is rather obscure.
However, there could be another entry to describe the change in winner.