From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Eli Zaretskii" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Will default key bindings spell the death of Emacs? Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 17:05:14 +0300 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <2593-Thu29May2003170513+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> References: <1054178219.882.88.camel@morgan> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1054217467 18268 80.91.224.249 (29 May 2003 14:11:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:11:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Thu May 29 16:11:05 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19LO6k-0004iD-00 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 16:10:18 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19LOLR-0005e7-00 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 16:25:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19LO7h-00013O-8P for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 29 May 2003 10:11:17 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19LO4I-00086i-KC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 May 2003 10:07:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19LO3Y-0007Yr-TN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 May 2003 10:07:01 -0400 Original-Received: from bilbo.inter.net.il ([192.114.186.18]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19LO1p-0006b4-PI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 May 2003 10:05:13 -0400 Original-Received: from zaretsky (cable-128-114.inter.net.il [213.8.128.114]) by bilbo.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.2.2-GA) with ESMTP id ATC00998; Thu, 29 May 2003 17:04:07 +0300 (IDT) Original-To: glen@organicdesign.org X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 In-reply-to: <1054178219.882.88.camel@morgan> (message from Glen Peterson on 28 May 2003 23:16:59 -0400) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:14417 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:14417 [I suggest to resend your message to emacs-devel.] > From: Glen Peterson > Reply-To: glen@organicdesign.org > Date: 28 May 2003 23:16:59 -0400 > > I believe that Emacs key bindings are effectively preventing 99% or more > of Windows programmers and other younger programmers from ever using > it. I think you greatly exaggerate the difficulty of adapting to Emacs key bindings. > I propose a toggle that sets emacs and all its IDEs into "Windows > Mode". While this might be a good idea, I think we need to change only a small set of bindings frequently used by Windows users. Otherwise, almost all of Emacs bindings will need to be changed, and most of the user manual will instantly become invalid where it describes key bindings. I suggest to try CUA mode (in the CVS sources) and see if it solves your problem well enough for it to become much less grave. > * The kill ring should not be used. Cut and copy and paste should > operate on the Windows clipboard Emacs does both, so I don't see why is the default operation a problem. A user who is unaware of the kill ring should be able to simply ignore it. > Delete - delete 1 char to the right. > Backspace - move and delete 1 char to the left These two already work like that. If you have any problems, please describe them. > cua-mode bindings is a good idea, but I don't think it goes far enough. The question is not whether CUA mode makes Emacs be a Windows program, the question is does it go far enough as to allow Windows users to become efficient Emacs users with minimal adaptation pain. > Particularly disturbing are the state sensitive M-x and C-x keys: > ftp://ftp.xemacs.org/pub/xemacs/contrib/cua-mode.el I sugegst to try the version of CUA mode that is part of the Emacs CVS sources, not the one in XEmacs (perhaps those are the same, I don't know). > Do any of you share these views? Why, or why not. Who else cares about > this issue and what can we do to bring about this important change? AFAIK, many (most?) Emacs users (certainly its developers) want Emacs to work the same on all supported platforms.