From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Will default key bindings spell the death of Emacs? Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 15:52:08 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <3ED67422.7060305@math.ku.dk> <20030529214728.GA24984@gnu.org> <200305300010.h4U0AiNY018227@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200305301310.h4UDAooo021860@rum.cs.yale.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1054410758 6131 80.91.224.249 (31 May 2003 19:52:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 19:52:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Sat May 31 21:52:29 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19MCOX-0001Xu-00 for ; Sat, 31 May 2003 21:52:01 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19MCeK-00075H-00 for ; Sat, 31 May 2003 22:08:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19MCPd-0000CD-0r for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Sat, 31 May 2003 15:53:09 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19MCP7-0008I1-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 May 2003 15:52:37 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19MCOl-0007pR-CG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 May 2003 15:52:16 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19MCOf-0007eW-3O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 May 2003 15:52:09 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.20) id 19MCOe-0007YD-S7; Sat, 31 May 2003 15:52:08 -0400 Original-To: "Stefan Monnier" In-reply-to: <200305301310.h4UDAooo021860@rum.cs.yale.edu> (monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu) Original-cc: larsh@math.ku.dk Original-cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:14522 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:14522 Good point. We could change those messages to take key-translation-map into account, but it would probably be wrong (because of other uses of key-translation-map where it shouldn't happen). Could you describe the two scenarios more precisely? In which case should the messages be changed? What is the case you are concerned about not changing them? So we'd need to add a new key-remapping layer, after key-translation-map and before the actual key-lookup. Please don't do this. It is not worth putting a lot of effort into making it somewhat easier to do radical changes in the Emacs command set. The users for that would be a tiny minority of Emacs users, and there are many areas (see etc/TODO) where we could spend the same effort and provide far more important features.