From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Concern about new binding. Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2021 13:21:02 +0200 Message-ID: <83pn1epxpd.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87zh0mmr54.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2g5smya.fsf@gmail.com> <4FF55FBF-573D-4A70-B3FC-682CA25B7ECB@gnu.org> <83lfc53whk.fsf@gnu.org> <20210203180142.seu6o3i6u7jhkyrh@Ergus> <83eehx3to5.fsf@gnu.org> <20210203221628.xgvvxjvh56gyswba@Ergus> <20210204070033.pm4ido4hq7a6twif@Ergus> <83sg6brhyg.fsf@gnu.org> <5588fb25805d486be704@heytings.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38269"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 05 12:22:03 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1l7zBb-0009qm-5W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 12:22:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47694 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7zBa-0006dG-95 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 06:22:02 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58766) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7zAd-0005zp-Ib for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 06:21:03 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:34929) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7zAd-0003Xq-2G; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 06:21:03 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:1881 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1l7zAZ-0007Mr-2B; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 06:21:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: <5588fb25805d486be704@heytings.org> (message from Gregory Heytings on Fri, 05 Feb 2021 09:21:20 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:263971 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2021 09:21:20 +0000 > From: Gregory Heytings > > A proposal to solve the current problem and future similar problems is to > free one of the keys, and to mention in `(elisp) Key Binding Conventions' > that it is, forever, reserved for external packages. > > This proposal has two forms: a weak and a strong one. The weak one would > only reserve the control key, the strong one would also reserve the meta > and control-meta keys. > > The candidate keys for that proposal are "z", "t" and "o". C-z, C-t, and C-o are already taken, and are very old bindings. C-t in particular is very useful and frequently-used (by me, FWIW), and also matches the default binding in Bash, GDB CLI, and elsewhere. A recent discussion demonstrated that at least for C-z enough people are against changing its binding, even though we have "C-x C-z" to do the same. These data points suggest that usurping these keys may not be easy, to say the least.