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: A more modest proposal Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:47:54 +0200 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <877hkm8tz9.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <4C3B6A8A.80105@gmx.de> <87wrt0e81n.fsf@telefonica.net> <62E9699C07054418AB66F9C5FCB54E5C@us.oracle.com> <87sk3oe3la.fsf@telefonica.net> <1154D96E7D2F401D849266F359E44BB9@us.oracle.com> <87ocecdzou.fsf@telefonica.net> <2256C17F740A425884AD551DE7758056@us.oracle.com> <87fwzodqqm.fsf@telefonica.net> <5138CDF30B2D4B778F948015614DA7BC@us.oracle.com> <87iq4ijtdy.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87bpa7uu1e.fsf@kanis.fr> <877hkv2hco.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87iq4e593w.fsf@kanis.fr> <87lj9ayp2f.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4C493433.4010709@censorshipresearch.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1279874912 6977 80.91.229.12 (23 Jul 2010 08:48:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:48:32 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 23 10:48:31 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OcDvg-0000L7-Qd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:48:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50756 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OcDvf-0003xT-WA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 04:48:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=56033 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OcDvU-0003ur-Js for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 04:48:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OcDvQ-0008Rq-JA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 04:48:16 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:51934) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OcDvQ-0008Rb-8N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 04:48:12 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OcDvG-00009n-Rd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:48:02 +0200 Original-Received: from p508ea91c.dip.t-dialin.net ([80.142.169.28]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:48:02 +0200 Original-Received: from dak by p508ea91c.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:48:02 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 30 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p508ea91c.dip.t-dialin.net X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:0x4k94z+XH9enQfClDtB5Ck18ak= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:127683 Archived-At: Miles Bader writes: > "Alfred M. Szmidt" writes: >> Having the same keybinding behave completely differently depending if >> you use a windowing system or the console is a bad idea. What about >> having C-z C-z do suspend-frame, and C-z z ... do undo? Not that I >> see a need for yet another undo keybinding. > > There's already a better binding for suspend-frame: "C-x C-z" > > So I'd say, just change the meaning of C-z universally to undo, and let > people use C-x C-z for suspend. Arguably if Emacs is started from a tty where C-z is set to susp, the user expectation might be that C-z suspends Emacs. Arguably similar expectations would hold for C-s, C-v, C-q, C-u, so I am not sure that this argument should prevail, even though C-z has a slightly different quality, being slightly useful as a working panic exit for the completely new user. I don't agree with Alfred that minimization on a window system is suitably similar to warrant the C-z keybinding as well on a window system. All in all, I don't think maintaining C-z in its current meaning is worth the trouble, particularly on window systems. -- David Kastrup