From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kaushal Modi Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Duplicate bindings? Ref: Ibuffer: Mark buffers by content Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 15:03:44 +0000 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113e129ef4c2ee0536e4c224 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1467731258 2586 80.91.229.3 (5 Jul 2016 15:07:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:07:38 +0000 (UTC) To: tino.calancha@gmail.com, Emacs developers Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 05 17:07:36 2016 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 1bKRwj-0002Rf-PU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 17:07:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55674 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKRwi-0004MK-SC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 11:07:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55893) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKRtG-00027o-9B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 11:03:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKRtE-0004Cd-7a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 11:03:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-oi0-x235.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c06::235]:36784) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKRtE-0004CZ-20 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 11:03:56 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-oi0-x235.google.com with SMTP id f189so232928524oig.3 for ; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 08:03:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=2+JkNW8UbLZgyIkeK9B+KsNXv/fntbE7COcmLkGaEjA=; b=H6xM177JH2d/POi5KmHbM2m6LwWJ/nIsVoqHBQhhG4xn6TNgEY6p5mxF86jh3RlGzC Pz7zonqWweEFH0V/I2lDR8eusgsqqyOEkYcwXXaUxr8XGVmiaj9gE5g87LOagWtCH2p7 F1Y3ZxGZBN7Gmbkd94V8gPLtaXAaOE140NN0lNrw8EUTXS2Upezuvtw4FkidaZt2tHR2 z51Zj+mcK4qv0nf7d+giG7x47Bi4fF9XBaIfVEyhutrMryebfutH3Q03R3aK14Km+1xh 3TCBGdJXk7/KJ2gAojrhWiylnTCgCBgLYO72HCjUyI8NzGw0FeWLfoiyvCIQPJAvLbpg u/lA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=2+JkNW8UbLZgyIkeK9B+KsNXv/fntbE7COcmLkGaEjA=; b=aXl/+c3Ysgu7OqkoK5yNIIXOFxJv9IPK+zzdRxtqPkrAxOT3Z34Dx19cD/nrQJCXix QgcOZ5ywPFlO+ICUB+FxiGD5enJhq5nitYCTpyu+nLPbaFfFUUpXmIPwqvg9+vgGlMew kuo5xe9L6JygSUoljNRz1G5fc5aTVdHuac7nZ/ggZuT18iFK1YQljJRkcFWqSG5y4MbI wnf2po4ZMxii1Zh3+7NY7rATbC/w9my0mlwS/r/1cPllkXBY7eIujqY0ihroGtet+mSY ZXgtow/hHbKy8jtbCA/MkiFeB+DbzV+PTmdRXqkMli9Ku9KnMa79qS23OEqIObAPAvSE sXsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tI7MaCj+D+aqT49tJiQDt2PhuCTo3sFjtJa9E7BzmT5sNKBFgBSycw4+12swLtZeojAvJ6wYpdyv5Fzpg== X-Received: by 10.157.53.9 with SMTP id o9mr10503370otc.185.1467731034815; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 08:03:54 -0700 (PDT) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4003:c06::235 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:205181 Archived-At: --001a113e129ef4c2ee0536e4c224 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 In this commit ( http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit/?id=08974112ae68aefba658a8516c8faa3374edc924 ), I am wondering why we have two bindings "%c" and "%g" call the same command? Why not have just one binding? That way, the user's get used to the same binding; we won't have a split where some prefer %c and some prefer %g. Then there are no bad feelings when/if one of the bindings might need to be sacrificed in future for some reason. OTOH, I am excited to try out this new feature. Thanks! -- -- Kaushal Modi --001a113e129ef4c2ee0536e4c224 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In this commit (=C2=A0ht= tp://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit/?id=3D08974112ae68aefba658a= 8516c8faa3374edc924=C2=A0), I am wondering why we have two bindings &qu= ot;%c" and "%g" call the same command?

Wh= y not have just one binding? That way, the = user's get used to the same binding; we won't have a split where so= me prefer %c and some prefer %g. Then there are no bad feelings when/if one= of the bindings might need to be sacrificed in future for some reason.

OTOH, I am excited to try out this new feature= .

Thanks!
--

--
Kaushal Modi

--001a113e129ef4c2ee0536e4c224--