From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Alfred M. Szmidt" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Suggested experimental test Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 18:54:56 -0400 Message-ID: References: <831ba60af0cbfdd95686@heytings.org> <87mtuxj8ue.fsf@gnus.org> <9088e12cb3169cdcdbc4@heytings.org> <9088e12cb3a70cbf66aa@heytings.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="2692"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 21 23:55:57 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 1lO6zE-0000bN-GJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 23:55:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59322 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lO6zD-00016h-CI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 18:55:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56668) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lO6yH-0000aa-QO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 18:54:57 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:45473) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lO6yH-0000kJ-7l; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 18:54:57 -0400 Original-Received: from ams by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lO6yG-0007cM-Co; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 18:54:56 -0400 In-Reply-To: <9088e12cb3a70cbf66aa@heytings.org> (message from Gregory Heytings on Sun, 21 Mar 2021 22:16:59 +0000) 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:266726 Archived-At: > What about C-o -- that seems to be hitting the trash can, for whatever > reason. Some of these bindings (C-o for example) have existed for 40 > years in Emacs (M-o M-s was once upon a time on M-s). > > There was alot of thought put into it back then, and the intent was to > make it easy to write code and text. That was the main intent of Emacs, > and main design decisions in the bindings. These "freeing up > keybindings" initiatives make it harder for people to use Emacs, not > easier. C-o is not at all "hitting the trash can", at the moment there is nothing more than a proposal to conduct an experiment to make a (small?) change to its meaning. It isn't a small change to remove a feature completely. When asked to keep _a_ binding, it has been meet with silence and it has been more important to inconvinence users than to listen to them, so I can only assume that this will a similar case for C-o. The overal tone of the discussion of removing keybindings has been to remove them without considering users, and that it is more important to free them up at all costs. C-o is, by the way, not even mentioned in the tutorial. Not everything is mentioned in the tutorial, nor can it. Emacs evolves very conservatively, and if at some point it becomes clear that some key binding is not useful for 99.9% of its users, there is no reason to keep it as is just because 40 years ago, under very different circumstances, it was considered convenient or useful. emacs-devel is not even 1% of people using Emacs, and the more I see these statements the more I am inclined to think that people on this list don't use Emacs. When it has been suggested to actually do a poll, it is far to cumbersome, and instead complicated schemes are devised.