From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs learning curve Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:56:42 +0900 Message-ID: <87k4oqzzj9.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <4C3B6A8A.80105@gmx.de> <87iq4f8gyh.fsf@telefonica.net> <874ofzl2ji.fsf@mithlond.arda> <201007162023.32116.tassilo@member.fsf.org> <87zkxrjihf.fsf@mithlond.arda> <8739vjf2k2.fsf@gmail.com> <8739vi8x39.fsf@mithlond.arda> <87oce6cdas.fsf@mithlond.arda> <87oce5ymfd.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87sk3g4mvl.fsf@mithlond.arda> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1279592761 31993 80.91.229.12 (20 Jul 2010 02:26:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 02:26:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Uday S. Reddy" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Teemu Likonen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 20 04:25:59 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 1Ob2Ws-0006UH-JN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 04:25:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41214 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ob2Wr-0003dQ-TX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:25:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60192 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ob2Wh-0003cB-Lq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:25:48 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob2Wg-0001Gi-7g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:25:47 -0400 Original-Received: from mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:36549) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ob2Wf-0001Fo-M4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:25:46 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8560820F; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:55:16 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B9C501A26B9; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:56:42 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <87sk3g4mvl.fsf@mithlond.arda> X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" ed3b274cc037 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:127594 Archived-At: Teemu Likonen writes: > * 2010-07-18 22:00 (+0900), Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > > Teemu Likonen writes: > >> But do we agree that using substitute-key-definition with reference > >> to global-map is bad and should be replaced with command remapping > >> (see above)? > > > > No. I think you'll find that it's not used as frequently as you think. > > I already did "M-x rgrep" on emacs.git/lisp directory before posting > anything about the function. Of course you did. I assumed that a grep would bring up dozens. The point is, in these things, absolute counts don't matter. If the count is more than a dozen, the work will be script-driven. What matters is what fraction of variant keybindings are done with s-k-d, compared to those done in other ways. Ie, what fraction of "the problem" can be solved by deciding "s-k-d is evil". > > The problem is when modes bind completely different functions to the > > keys. If you decide to rearrange the mappings of core commands, users > > of such mode will lose. > > But > > (define-key MAP [remap next-line] 'new-next-line) > > is great, though. But what does it mean? Have you got an implementation? Remember, the second argument to define-key is a key sequence. I have no problem with overloading the definition to allow "remappable commands" there, but I have no clue as to what semantics you are proposing because keymaps currently have no notion of "remappable commands as keys". The semantics I have considered are of no help. I just ended up with more indirection, not more functionality. Maybe you can do better, though -- and that would be a substantial contribution.