From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Keybinding nit Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 09:43:00 +0200 Message-ID: <85d58nph4r.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <85d58p7hyu.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85irig78t9.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <45386168.8060700@swipnet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1161369865 28557 80.91.229.2 (20 Oct 2006 18:44:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 18:44:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 20 20:44:19 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GazLn-0001rH-Bz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 20:44:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GazLm-0004Pz-QE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 14:44:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GaqQR-0005at-FP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 05:12:23 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GaqQQ-0005Xm-0f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 05:12:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GaqQP-0005WP-9A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 05:12:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GaqQO-0004KZ-N4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 05:12:20 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1GaqQH-0001PL-BH; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 05:12:13 -0400 Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 7197D1C4F93E; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 09:43:00 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: "Jan D." In-Reply-To: <45386168.8060700@swipnet.se> (Jan D.'s message of "Fri\, 20 Oct 2006 07\:40\:56 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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:60950 Archived-At: "Jan D." writes: > David Kastrup skrev: >> Richard Stallman writes: >> >>> C-x 4 0 and C-x 5 0 are not at all symmetric, and C-x 4 0 is not >>> really intuitive. >>> >>> Maybe one should rather have C-x 4 k and C-x 5 k for killing both >>> buffer and window/frame? >>> >>> Since C-x k reads a buffer name, I would expect C-x 4 k to >>> read a buffer name also. >> >> Well, I wouldn't (there are quite a few keybindings where "k" just >> kills something). And since neither C-x 0 nor C-x 5 0 kills a buffer, >> I would not expect C-x 4 0 to do it, either. >> >> It all boils down to what feels more natural and expected. Of course >> that is a matter of personal taste, and I like to think my taste is >> not too far out here. Other opinions? > > I think changing C-x 4 0 to just kill the window and adding C-x 4 k to kill > buffer and window makes sense. > > But I have a question for C-x 5 k. If you have more than one window > showing different buffers in the frame, shall it kill all the > buffers, or prompt for the one to kill? I'd assume the latter. The > prompt could be skipped if there is just one buffer shown in that > frame. Good catch. I'd just kill the selected window of the frame. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum