From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Pascal J. Bourguignon" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `C-b' is backward-char, `left' is left-char - why? Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 22:48:52 +0200 Organization: Informatimago Message-ID: <8762ovj2dn.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> References: <6F4054004B154CFB8E2753172D316C13@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1306529807 19447 80.91.229.12 (27 May 2011 20:56:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 20:56:47 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 27 22:56:43 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 1QQ45K-0000Mv-Q4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 May 2011 22:56:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51550 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QQ45K-0002Kb-Ea for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 May 2011 16:56:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:42726) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QQ45G-0002KK-Qk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 May 2011 16:56:39 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QQ45F-0000fY-Bm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 May 2011 16:56:38 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:51159) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QQ45F-0000fQ-6p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 May 2011 16:56:37 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QQ45D-0000JC-3X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 May 2011 22:56:35 +0200 Original-Received: from 81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com ([81.202.16.46]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 27 May 2011 22:56:35 +0200 Original-Received: from pjb by 81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 27 May 2011 22:56:35 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 31 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwAQMAAABtzGvEAAAABlBMVEUAAAD///+l2Z/dAAAA oElEQVR4nK3OsRHCMAwF0O8YQufUNIQRGIAja9CxSA55AxZgFO4coMgYrEDDQZWPIlNAjwq9 033pbOBPtbXuB6PKNBn5gZkhGa86Z4x2wE67O+06WxGD/HCOGR0deY3f9Ijwwt7rNGNf6Oac l/GuZTF1wFGKiYYHKSFAkjIo1b6sCYS1sVmFhhhahKQssRjRT90ITWUk6vvK3RsPGs+M1RuR mV+hO/VvFAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Accept-Language: fr, es, en User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:YmY4MjRjNzkxMTJmYTExNjg1ZmU3MDI2NWQwOWY4YjZjNzY4MDJiZQ== X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 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:139776 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: > I'm curious. Why is it a good idea that `C-b' and `left' are no longer bound to > the same command? C-h k gives: runs the command backward-char, which is an interactive ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ C-h k C-b gives: C-b runs the command backward-char, which is an interactive built-in ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I don't see any difference in my emacs-version "23.2.1". > I'm not asking about the difference; I can see that from the doc strings. I'm > wondering why we've broken their longstanding correspondence. Major or minor modes however may set their own bindings. Perhaps you have a buffer in a mode that defines a command named left, and which binds to it? You can check the binding of the current modes with C-h m -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.