From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thierry Volpiatto Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Unuseful keybindings Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:32:23 +0100 Organization: Emacs Helm Message-ID: <87ehimeemg.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87sj73qzvl.fsf@gmail.com> <87623zquvw.fsf@gmail.com> <5D7D686F0451473081716BAAE7264CC6@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1355898761 13858 80.91.229.3 (19 Dec 2012 06:32:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 06:32:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, 'Andreas Schwab' , 'Mathias Dahl' To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 19 07:32:55 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TlDD0-0004ki-Iq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:32:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45436 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TlDCn-0000YI-0A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 01:32:37 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60864) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TlDCk-0000XZ-MP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 01:32:35 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TlDCj-0002EO-GJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 01:32:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-we0-f182.google.com ([74.125.82.182]:49353) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TlDCj-0002EJ-74 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 01:32:33 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-we0-f182.google.com with SMTP id u54so717130wey.41 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:32:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:cc:subject:organization:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=ICc1XqnWta5BMuhCLJNfJVJZO/lT0Te2aAi8brBggLs=; b=NoO2W0eT9olstYdOFyhJWyzQczYk5Z621nsC2WSv+XxKgPWViXo5/sdWyX7i5MvuBq 0zy4EJEBWxuCPKvw6Uy6UtVdEKp1NHiiBN22gLSwaS+Y1yxorL9AdxE00FWRgtPjnHHr cXjuEp0P8mAWyLRtrzC6rTgVBa8r7UKtNZX9JPJ/IERKgNOisjDDNc4cviehdSZW1Ao8 Jk1/IJeAYOz25wOKPsSUxcakHUsbaGakb6pH5Ky0aco2gAfH2rfPDTSE3X+IM602cMuk TT9if/vGHL6r+u8ooGoSzvvInyRZIDkKF0ytq9nHCYBRIajve/ZVXAqUc4EamPHdBrBL sMjg== X-Received: by 10.180.87.73 with SMTP id v9mr1872115wiz.26.1355898752378; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:32:32 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from dell-14z (lbe83-2-78-243-104-167.fbx.proxad.net. [78.243.104.167]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g2sm6359664wiy.0.2012.12.18.22.32.30 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:32:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5D7D686F0451473081716BAAE7264CC6@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:27:46 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/24.2.91 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 74.125.82.182 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:155669 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: >> Can't you just rebind these keys? I mean, you would >> have to do that anyway, to use them for your purposes, right? > > Yes, but the fact that users can do that is never a good enough reason _on its > own_ for Emacs Dev to sacrifice a particular key sequence for a default binding. > > For one thing, the very fact that there exists a default key binding sometimes > dissuades libraries from binding the key sequence, because some user will holler > bloody hell that the library steps on a default key binding, even if using the > library is a voluntary act, and even if the user can override the library > binding. > > No, there is nothing wrong with a user or a library doing that, but some people > overly respect what they see as the established order, even though Emacs points > out in its doc that you are free to customize etc. Somehow, default key > bindings can tend, for some people, to take on a sacred aura. > > An additional rationale was given in this case, however, I believe. IIRC > (excuse me if I remember incorrectly), this was it: many people use it outside > Emacs for the same (or a similar) thing. > > I find that particular rationale quite weak, if it stands alone. Yes, it has > _some_ merit, but there can be much stronger, internal-consistency or > user-behavior reasons for Emacs to bind a given key sequence by default. > > For one thing, a key such as `f11' is repeatable, so it is preferable not to > waste it on a command/action that is not repeatable by just holding down the > key. Most possible key sequences (e.g. `C-x r l') are not repeatable, and we > should make best use of those that are. Repeatable keys are a scarce resource, > to be treasured and put to wise use. > > We first went down this silly path when we bound `f3' and `f4' - not too long > ago. That was a big mistake, IMHO. Or was `f10' prior? > > Well, you could even argue that the first such abuse was binding `f1', but there > are a lot more people who know and use `f1' for help outside Emacs than there > are that use `f11'. Plus, `f1' is precisely for getting help. There is a much > stronger case to be made for sacrificing `f1' than `f3', `f4', `f10', or `f11', > IMO. > > It used to be that Emacs made an effort to stay away from binding function keys. > Alas, that boat sailed long ago. 1+ -- Thierry Get my Gnupg key: gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 59F29997