From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Standardizing more key bindings? Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2020 23:38:55 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83zh55f7bv.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="7918"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, thibaut.verron@gmail.com, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 04 05:40:42 2020 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 1kOut7-0001x5-TO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2020 05:40:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57330 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kOut6-0000eo-Qw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 23:40:40 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54828) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kOurS-0007B9-Tn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 23:38:58 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:34520) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kOurS-0008HF-Iq; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 23:38:58 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kOurP-0004b7-D0; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 23:38:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <83zh55f7bv.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Fri, 02 Oct 2020 09:52:20 +0300) 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:257004 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > > Thus, I think we should plan on having these bindings only > > in the major modes that involve talking to an intepreter. > They could also be defined by prog-mode, which is (or should be) the > parent of all programming modes. There are quite a few programming modes where these operations are not useful -- compiled languages which don't have an interpreter. Perhaps someday C will have an interpreter. (I tried to get that done, 30 years ago.) One could argue that the interpreter keys should be kept available for that purpose even in C mode. On the other hand, those keys might have existing definitions in these modes, and finding other bindings for those definitions could be a pain. And that would be an incompatible change. On the gripping hand, it wouldn't be hard to make the specific modes override the new prog-mode bindings with their traditional definitions. So I guess it is ok to put them in prog-mode. But that presumes we use just one command to implement each of these operations, in all the modes where they are useful. -- Dr Richard Stallman Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)