Re: Proposal: add a binding for `imenu' under M-g

[chad <yandros@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1185 bytes --]

I don't have a strong opinion in this area, as someone who doesn't use
imenu very much, but I feel like I was asked to support my intuition, so:

On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 4:15 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> > While M-g would mean "go".  And stuff like "M-g g", "M-g c", they
> > request input only to go somewhere.  imenu falls in this category -
> > request input (select from completions) and go there.
>
> To me, imenu is a facility to find definitions of functions, so it is
> conceptually very similar to M-. and other such features.  We don't
> perceive M-. as a "go" command, do we?
>

 I *do* feel like C-u M-. is a "go" command, similar to the others, since
it prompts for input and "goes" there, but I also understand that the
difference between "go" and "find/search" is intentionally fuzzy in emacs.

I think C-x ` is another good example of a command that fits in the concept
that I recall suggested for M-g back when it was added, and I notice that
it actually has a binding in M-g, which I think supports the idea of M-g as
"go" and also that it's ok to have some longstanding "go" functionality be
bound both inside M-g and outside.

I hope that helps,
~Chad

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1734 bytes --]