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: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:37:01 +0200 Message-ID: <85mz7souma.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <85d58p7hyu.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85irig78t9.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <17719.56017.158858.353004@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <85vemgowxv.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <17719.60358.608003.415676@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1161361321 25670 80.91.229.2 (20 Oct 2006 16:22:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 16:22:01 +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 18:22:00 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 1Gax7r-0003lk-Dx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 18:21:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gax7q-000699-Pb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 12:21:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gafaa-0001PF-JI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:38:08 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GafaZ-0001Mv-CV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:38:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GafaZ-0001Mo-7x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:38:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GafaZ-0006p6-9o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:38:07 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1GafaR-00051Y-Op; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:38:00 -0400 Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 8D1D61C4F93E; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:37:01 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Nick Roberts In-Reply-To: <17719.60358.608003.415676@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> (Nick Roberts's message of "Fri\, 20 Oct 2006 10\:19\:02 +1300") 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:60934 Archived-At: Nick Roberts writes: > > > If you mean move C-x 4 0 to C-x 5 k, I agree. (I'm not sure > > > what you want C-x 4 k to do). > > > > Serves me right. If it weren't for disagreement, I'd have no > > agreement at all. I'd have proposed to move C-x 4 0 > > (`kill-buffer-and-window') to C-x 4 k and have C-x 5 k be mapped to > > `kill-buffer-and-frame' (which does not yet exist). > > Sorry, I misunderstood what C-x 4 0 does (I don't use it). Yes, C-x > 5 k for kill-buffer-and-frame seems a good idea. Well, I checked the age of the binding C-x 4 0, and it is about 10 years old, so it has quite a bit of history and should probably not be removed in one step, but rather get a companion binding. I think I might have discovered `kill-buffer-and-window' quite sooner would it have had the proposed binding C-x 4 k which I find easier to remember (that's where I would have suspected the binding to be in the first place). Whether or not we do this for Emacs 22 (it would imply messing with the refcards, but it should be sufficient to just replace the binding itself and none of the text), I think this should be done eventually. Keybindings are hard enough to remember, and when they get more logical, people are more likely to use them. I find the relation between C-x k and C-x 4 k much more logical than that of C-x 0 and C-x 4 0 (C-x 4 k implies "do something similar to C-x k, but involving a window" which is better than C-x 4 0 implying something similar to C-x 0, but involving a buffer). In fact we have: `iswitchb-mode' Minor Mode Bindings Starting With C-x 4: key binding --- ------- C-x 4 C-o iswitchb-display-buffer C-x 4 b iswitchb-buffer-other-window Global Bindings Starting With C-x 4: --- ------- C-x 4 C-f find-file-other-window C-x 4 C-j dired-jump-other-window C-x 4 . find-tag-other-window C-x 4 0 kill-buffer-and-window C-x 4 a add-change-log-entry-other-window C-x 4 c clone-indirect-buffer-other-window C-x 4 d dired-other-window C-x 4 f find-file-other-window C-x 4 m compose-mail-other-window C-x 4 r find-file-read-only-other-window [back] And most commands starting with C-x 4 are variations of C-x or C-x C- on a window. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum