From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `C-b' is backward-char, `left' is left-char - why? Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 11:26:59 +0300 Message-ID: <83ipsvb57w.fsf@gnu.org> References: <6F4054004B154CFB8E2753172D316C13@us.oracle.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1306571229 4505 80.91.229.12 (28 May 2011 08:27:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 08:27:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 28 10:27:05 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QQErP-0007ih-NX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:27:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55754 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QQErP-0005Jr-A1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 28 May 2011 04:27:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:45996) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QQErM-0005Jj-Ph for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 28 May 2011 04:27:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QQErM-0007dD-1P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 28 May 2011 04:27:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:52406) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QQErL-0007d4-RQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 28 May 2011 04:27:00 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LLW00200BYRQW00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 28 May 2011 11:26:54 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.221.158]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LLW001JUCSTT2G0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 28 May 2011 11:26:54 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 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:139823 Archived-At: > From: "Drew Adams" > Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 18:54:51 -0700 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > My point was to _ask_ whether changing these bindings globally is > necessary. I simply asked whether there wasn't some way to avoid > changing them. There's been a lot of heat, but not much in the way > of an explanation. Since the blame for this change is mine and mine alone (I did discuss it with Stefan in private email, but only after making that change), the only real explanation is what I already wrote in an earlier message: I didn't find a better solution. I happen to be happy with that solution, but I'm ready to hear suggestions for better ones. > How the implementation would move between having these new bindings in place for > bidi and not making them when bidi is disabled is not something I would try to > answer. I asked whether it was possible. In some complicated and inelegant way, sure. But we here happen to dislike complicated and inelegant ways when less complicated and more elegant ones are available that have no significant disadvantages.