From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: chad Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Suggested experimental test Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:06:10 -0700 Message-ID: References: <87mtuxj8ue.fsf@gnus.org> <9088e12cb3de3d30abf1@heytings.org> <8735wnjsum.fsf@gnus.org> <83sg4n9jei.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2efhx3e.fsf@gnus.org> <838s6f9g5d.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2efgg3w.fsf@gnus.org> <878s6fgdzu.fsf@gnus.org> <19c1ec9e-a97f-a8ab-b966-edadbc299c39@yandex.ru> <83mtuu8gdz.fsf@gnu.org> <87tup26om4.fsf@posteo.net> <831rc682js.fsf@gnu.org> <1bfef8b5-aa26-f64f-1e3b-06aabc9e9939@yandex.ru> <83y2ee6kmx.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f2a73605be3a8de1" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="27348"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: "Philip K." , Jean Louis , EMACS development team , Gregory Heytings , Stefan Kangas , Dmitry Gutov , Lars Ingebrigtsen To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 23 22:07:03 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lOoEw-0006zn-O4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 22:07:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54834 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOoEv-0000nx-Mh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:07:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35746) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOoEM-00009a-Iq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:06:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lf1-x136.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::136]:42986) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOoEK-0005c1-Ve; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:06:26 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lf1-x136.google.com with SMTP id o10so28733476lfb.9; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:06:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=rn0q3pA8WfdT9QanukRIiMHIgayoLpdhyiMSmLiQFLc=; b=CHXvZfHsMYDrOyv1lADyJZE1qOCi7QtfAywzqgl/EtA4zkpS7YAX6l/0vehxmSJ2EK 7NYi19VPZ7Xq0ObkSzG43EEhHmr4WvGIYnyCBtvJVDmPk63qD5D+Zw8/0TeSNCM99LsC i1jwZRLquVR+z2pg8GeagMEjK4BIw4SmILTdVAgXyPMqxZHNDOKXc2eXccAOaIH6US2s RyaAv04G09M6lmwPM5KHi1JQ76J3HmiKDlG5EgnpxrdLekrlm5iojhmTdiwAPBxzRxFl QUNiYq4yOGlEt/PC192+yjaBuKESDbEARqkk7sbyK73HNieK5GiKsjtiKP6BUd0X/UbM kpEw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=rn0q3pA8WfdT9QanukRIiMHIgayoLpdhyiMSmLiQFLc=; b=L31AwDi1Jal3Lt60DHFjCJq2pMe4rrUaXXrOzmO4PfKAwuXWn6QZRV7Sf4alKTYd8R zI3QAtb0UQgeFXACH9JirY2HhCIX/2wJlLutN4MPoEKSay1sVYVFnfwhGCoxMc+9HdJB /7SqYgR0ZUoV1qcqtf/AhYpb/YGsMvXmSETzrDWHEOHnK5x4nZpFg+JwetQCJZFh4ZZa NcVfECyl3AE1XLb3j447AiKCNOFL5hsT5RaKTNKqm/1LMg63yWPg10o13q1wbaazQxDR 4XNhrbtdRz3y3ta8fD79g3x3bQ0tTNZlASQTRuhUisYCPOqfepjd4EKCVkZXPl7bUxUi RhQg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530o2YutmLALmSfZ0j/slp3B3q7rTJjDPGIMFcJ+uGoqqlLxgdQc ukgtyaY8fjTC3ncKq3UKZTUzkodOPscT2FkzXSwyjvnG3eE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy9ETieE7Oz6kUlCSvZ/TjttTT4WdsZVbvZBsvX/y3huXmkqSC8RJuwIMSKiZLUloZBnD5RuFIU905Kj3Xlju0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:36c9:: with SMTP id e9mr3381293lfs.556.1616533582422; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:06:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83y2ee6kmx.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::136; envelope-from=yandros@gmail.com; helo=mail-lf1-x136.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:266892 Archived-At: --000000000000f2a73605be3a8de1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:05 AM Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Cc: bugs@gnu.support, larsi@gnus.org, gregory@heytings.org, > > emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com > > From: Dmitry Gutov > > Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:09:50 +0200 > > > > Having an alternative, well-considered set of bindings which new user > > can just toggle on and get comfortable should be valuable. > > I doubt that, because we already tried that in CUA mode. That one > actually was better posed to succeed, since its key bindings weren't > invented "out of thin air", but use widely accepted conventions. > FWIW, over the years, I have seen several people who were very interested in CUA mode who eventually turned it off due to it working "most but not all of the time". This experience is pretty old, but internet searches show similar feedback continuing since then. In practice, it means that users who might have recommended cua-mode instead anti-recommend it. When I've looked at it for other people, it seems like an issue that can't actually be fixed, because the people who care enough to change the bindings need them to be absolutely %100 reliable, which the time-based approach isn't. I'm afraid that I can't help more than that -- emacs' default bindings are far more ingrained for me than the CUA bindings (a fact that I learned to accept long ago when moving away from emacs' `C-w' and `C-q'). This is all to say: cua-mode has its own set of problems as an example. ~Chad --000000000000f2a73605be3a8de1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:05 AM Eli Z= aretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> Cc: bugs@gnu.= support, larsi@gnus.org= , gregory@hey= tings.org,
>=C2=A0 emacs-d= evel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:09:50 +0200
>
> Having an alternative, well-considered set of bindings which new user =
> can just toggle on and get comfortable should be valuable.

I doubt that, because we already tried that in CUA mode.=C2=A0 That one
actually was better posed to succeed, since its key bindings weren't invented "out of thin air", but use widely accepted conventions.<= br>

FWIW, over the years, I have seen sever= al people who were very interested in CUA mode who eventually turned it off= due to it working "most but not all of the time". This experienc= e is pretty old, but internet searches show similar feedback continuing sin= ce then. In practice, it means that users who might have recommended cua-mo= de instead anti-recommend it.

When I've looked= at it for other people, it seems like an issue that can't actually be = fixed, because the people who care enough to change the bindings need them = to be absolutely %100 reliable, which the time-based approach isn't. I&= #39;m afraid that I can't help more than that -- emacs' default bin= dings are far more ingrained for me than the CUA bindings (a fact that I le= arned to accept long ago when moving away from emacs' `C-w' and `C-= q').

This is all to say: cua-mode has its own = set of problems as an example.
~Chad
--000000000000f2a73605be3a8de1--