From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Bikeshedding go! Why is unbound? Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 07:01:18 -0800 Message-ID: <57BF13882D6E494286547F293FE9D03B@us.oracle.com> References: <87sjx7z7w4.fsf@telefonica.net> <83pqsbmf6j.fsf@gnu.org> <87k4ijz07h.fsf@telefonica.net> <2460D97DEA4047B3B9DF92C4A80981EF@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1294844560 28507 80.91.229.12 (12 Jan 2011 15:02:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:02:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?'=D3scar_Fuentes'?= , 'Lennart Borgman' , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Stuart Hacking'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 12 16:02:35 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd2Da-0005nn-Fd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 16:02:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45543 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pd2DZ-0006oC-SA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:02:33 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=38705 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pd2DS-0006nB-Kh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:02:27 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd2DR-0001Ni-EQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:02:26 -0500 Original-Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]:41398) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd2DR-0001NS-2L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:02:25 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id p0CF2Hsu024639 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:02:19 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt355.oracle.com (acsmt355.oracle.com [141.146.40.155]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id p0C8WsmU011683; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:02:16 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt010.oracle.com by acsmt353.oracle.com with ESMTP id 919117181294844481; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 07:01:21 -0800 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.223.199) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 07:01:20 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcuyYCSML6l0QjyHQoyNo6uyhlD44wACCixA X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:134462 Archived-At: > > There is no reason for Emacs to bind Alt-F4 (or M-f4) by default. > > It should be kept for anyone to bind to anything. =A0(Just=20 > > one more opinion.) >=20 > On the other hand, it wouldn't be a big deal for Emacs to have a > default binding. Anyone who cares enough will be able to rebind it. >=20 > There's always discussion about making Emacs a more well behaved > application on Windows and this seems like a low-hanging fruit? I respectfully disagree. 1. There's _no special reason_ to give _this_ key a default binding. 2. While it is true that a default binding can be overridden, that's not = a good enough argument for making a _particular_ default binding. 3. Default bindings tend to become sacrosanct in the eyes of many over = time. A library (or even a user) that binds one can be thought by some to be = going against the grain (convention). 4. It's not because some key is unbound that we should give it a default binding. If the argument that a default binding can always be = overridden were sufficient for creating default bindings, then we would bind _every_ key = by default. Even a random default binding would be bound to please = someone, and "Anyone who cares enough will be able to rebind it." 5. Slippery slope. Windows uses key XYZ for blah, so we bind it. Then = someone says "Hey, we respect the Windows binding by default for XYZ, why not = also for UVW and RST and ...? "It wouldn't be a big deal for Emacs to have a default binding" - = epitaph on a tombstone in Boot Hill, Tombstone, Arizona.