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: Why change the advertised bindings of Isearch commands? Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 08:50:25 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <6191c91b-e09a-4cf2-859d-7370e1300924@default> References: <> <<83k2p3sq71.fsf@gnu.org>> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1448643067 5807 80.91.229.3 (27 Nov 2015 16:51:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:51:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@linkov.net To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 27 17:50:52 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1a2MEK-0000bT-7q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 17:50:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57553 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a2MEM-0001PS-W5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 11:50:43 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60242) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a2MEE-0001Ns-BQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 11:50:35 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a2MED-0006bm-7H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 11:50:34 -0500 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:38968) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a2ME8-0006bF-VE; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 11:50:29 -0500 Original-Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id tARGoRmm025866 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:50:27 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tARGoQ6r021987 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:50:27 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0005.oracle.com (abhmp0005.oracle.com [141.146.116.11]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tARGoQwh001916; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:50:26 GMT In-Reply-To: <<83k2p3sq71.fsf@gnu.org>> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:195386 Archived-At: > > Using M-c to exit and capitalize means removing it as a key > > that does something useful _in_ Isearch. >=20 > And evidently, the desire to remove it means we think its binding > outside Isearch is more useful. We do? How and when did we decide that? What were the arguments pro and con - where can I find the discussion? Did we poll the users, to get their take on this? =20 > > > What you are saying is that a user who spots a word to be > > > capitalized during Isearch needs to do at least 2 things: > > > exit Isearch with some key, then type M-c. > > > > Exactly as it has always been: `RET M-c'. >=20 > The intent of the advertised bindings is to change that at some > future point. Since when do we advertise bindings for that reason? Can you point to a case where we've done that? An advertised binding is typically used to ensure that the simplest or most flexible binding gets advertised, instead of a more complex binding that the tools would otherwise automatically report as "the" binding. At any rate, it's that intention to "change that at some future point" that I haven't seen discussed or decided. And that I disagree with. But if it _has_ been discussed and decided then I have no problem supporting the decision, even if I disagree with it. > > And not "at least 2 things". Exactly 2 things: exit & act. >=20 > No, it's "at least 2 things". Because depending on how you exit > Isearch you may need to move point first. Oh come on. Sure, you _could_ exit with a key that you bind to a function that does whatever nutty thing you like, and then have to move back where you were. This is 100% beside the point (seems like arguing for the sake of arguing), since there are other keys (e.g. RET) that do _not_ take you all around Robinson's barn. > > So far, no reason for this change in defaults (for 3 keys) > > was even given. AFAIK, it ain't broke; no need to fix it. >=20 > That's a different issue. You asked why the advertised > bindings were changed; you now have the answer, I hope. No, my question is why _should_ we change these bindings? Your answer is that they were changed because we decided to change them. Sheesh. How about an argument to support the change and the intention to remove these Isearch bindings? How about polling the users? > > As I said, "different users care to have different keys > > exit and act immediately". >=20 > There are facilities to tailor the commands that exit > Isearch, if the user doesn't like the defaults. Precisely. So why the need for this change? That's the question (still unanswered). > > But let's hear some arguments in favor of the changes, > > please. >=20 > That's a separate discussion. No, that's exactly what this thread is about. I started the thread, and that is what my question is: _Why_ should we change these bindings? Reasons, please. You seem to be content to say that the "reason" for the change is that Juri made the change - he decided that it should be made and he made it. That's the starting point for the question; it does not answer the question.