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: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 21:44:42 +0300 Message-ID: <86tthjcxd1.fsf@gnu.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40554"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Alan Mackenzie , stefankangas@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: dancol@dancol.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jun 23 20:45:07 2024 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 1sLSD4-000AJa-Ak for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 20:45:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sLSCn-0006ox-4g; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 14:44:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sLSCl-0006oO-1o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 14:44:47 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sLSCk-00056i-9N; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 14:44:46 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=IZuYohMuApxXXep2h77tAqW3u/4+XnWy+1YCyPXZVjY=; b=ISzv/kmh0Q7c6ThTQYfz 6JiM7G3VFrFekZkHiGk+aCdWWMCyo7d+fsyWxPL9Up48JIqjBEK75pIfisIIZnvU9a5Cds/3H1K+s BqeI/GgnxR6D6kco4ejJViyIDB4hl7veIVIQY5IyyGFpBtDLNnNUTV8dZGstE0Fsl0wmM4/Zg//UP N/4B9+9EkYWZI7OJaSUHoDZthC8DXBA7sibVv9wH5ztQ0CTjlrVvj4EoVi75h4z3fvm4isYJvEW2G YliZJw2F6KXr3rPomrVXToFv210c3Hsad/P/YehQCjUhTfhKH5C1M4SLqBK34SbQ//yajHow0EmBA GqV1oSKlra9+5w==; In-Reply-To: (message from Alan Mackenzie on Sun, 23 Jun 2024 10:05:13 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:320558 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 10:05:13 +0000 > Cc: Stefan Monnier , > Daniel Colascione , emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Alan Mackenzie > > Hello, Stefan and Stefan. > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 15:39:09 -0500, Stefan Kangas wrote: > > Stefan Monnier writes: > > > > A few years ago, Daniel suggested: > > >> Likewise, for windmove, we can bind C-x 4 {left, right, up, down} and DWIM > > >> for people automatically, enabled by default. > > > > > > AFAICT we still don't actually provide any keybindings for the windmove > > > commands by default. Did I miss a controversy about that, or did it > > > just fall through the cracks? > > > FWIW, I don't remember any controversy either, so my guess is that it > > just fell through the cracks. > > I would be against using C-x 4 or C-x 5 for > windmove (or anything else) by default. Key sequences with arrow keys > are too few, and too precious, to use for anything not critically > important. I'm not sure we all are on the same page regarding what is being proposed. For that matter, I didn't see a detailed proposal, so I'm not surprised people are arguing against something that probably isn't on the table. For starters, windmove is not a preloaded package (neither is winner, but since this seems to be only about winmove, I guess winer needs a separate discussion). To have it available, you need to load it, either explicitly or by invoking one of the commands (which are autoloaded). I presume that the proposal for giving windmove commands key bindings means that the bindings will become in effect once the package is loaded, because nothing else makes much sense to me. Is that indeed what's being proposed? Does anyone have a problem with an optional package which, when loaded, binds some keys to its commands? That's a far cry from a naïve interpretation of "giving default key bindings to windmove". because a user who loads a package expresses his/her interest in using that package, and so binding some keys for that makes sense, and doesn't affect users who are not interested in the package. Now, windmove already has the windmove-default-keybindings command, which installs key bindings for its commands. They are not "C-x 4 " bindings, though. If the proposal is to perform key bindings when the package is loaded, and use "C-x 4 " for that, then we need to make sure windmove-default-keybindings will reset the bindings back to their current defaults, because otherwise users of windmove will not be happy. Any objections to the above detailed proposal? Assuming there are no significant objections, would someone like to take upon themselves to submit a patch along those lines?