From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Colascione Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 10:18:17 -0400 Message-ID: References: <7133BE83-064B-43A4-A193-61376605222C@dancol.org> <055E6E92-6971-409E-A106-7E0C64FEF856@dancol.org> <87bk3r22x5.fsf@yahoo.com> <746FE961-37C5-4387-8274-7D90908EE2D6@dancol.org> <8734p3219c.fsf@yahoo.com> <867cefeo1w.fsf@gnu.org> <8734p03e94.fsf@jeremybryant.net> <867cec9ccl.fsf@gnu.org> <87v81vx12n.fsf@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31026"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Jeremy Bryant , acm@muc.de, stefankangas@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 26 16:19:02 2024 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 1sMTUD-0007uP-Iz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 16:19:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sMTTk-0007Z3-M7; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 10:18:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sMTTh-0007YS-QJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 10:18:30 -0400 Original-Received: from dancol.org ([2600:3c01:e000:3d8::1]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sMTTc-0006hO-AQ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 10:18:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dancol.org; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID: References:In-Reply-To:Subject:CC:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=TC+xypR0uIPCxuNzy/CNI24PR1NCqLAi9XIgmFqynJA=; b=pyK/WnDIdgxm276bObWuyHTt8D jEJx149pn5539ou81uITNEZjXhAk7ngOSINnM71+2qfeQtIi0RnrLss2KNKIlV9Q01KfuLoCLgOj6 QO0kTWVS+eVqs5Fmw3D4CNNdKOqGNgaeOeIEb8J8zdpr1nfqqIbuED2Et1N/FlnascU3lhL8v43D3 39HkF/dubmorHjR6ldoRUJ4CN5fs4WuzYo5NqXD9cFJNgaxYYQK5QUQXICLzMpP7tGAN3bC0JcnNm 3PjE6AlYdzysvJjypCRVVGKD3AlKdVCaXTUjQI2wutOzEGZWPYhWz3KFIY1i6Dqltsakh6gzQktbn tN9xJwig==; Original-Received: from 2603-9001-4203-1ab2-3cec-3bc2-2295-1139.inf6.spectrum.com ([2603:9001:4203:1ab2:3cec:3bc2:2295:1139]:33912 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by dancol.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sMTTY-0002Ax-H6; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 10:18:21 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87v81vx12n.fsf@yahoo.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2600:3c01:e000:3d8::1; envelope-from=dancol@dancol.org; helo=dancol.org 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, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:320693 Archived-At: On June 26, 2024 9:53:20 AM EDT, Po Lu wrote: >Daniel Colascione writes: > >> On June 26, 2024 7:23:38 AM EDT, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>>> From: Jeremy Bryant >>>> Cc: Po Lu , dancol@dancol=2Eorg, acm@muc=2Ede= , >>>> stefankangas@gmail=2Ecom, monnier@iro=2Eumontreal=2Eca, emacs-dev= el@gnu=2Eorg >>>> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 22:26:47 +0100 >>>>=20 >>>> 1=2E >>>> I also find that C-x 4 is indeed logical, which makes it easier to re= member >>>>=20 >>>> 2=2E >>>> C-x 4 =2E=2E works on the terminal/console=2E This is important for >>>> preserving functionality of Emacs=2E >>> >>>I still hope that someone will tell what is exactly the request here, >>>given that windmove-mode is on by default and its commands are >>>autoloaded=2E >> >> To be clear, my proposal is to bind C-x 4 in the default >> global keymap to the corresponding directional windmove commands and >> to bind the shifted versions of these keys to the state swapping >> versions of these movement commands=2E IOW, in emacs -Q, C-x 4 LEFT >> should move left=2E > >C-x 4 is not for window management commands, but for commands that >influence which window the results of a future command are to be >displayed in, and it has been so for a substantial period, so that users >won't bat an eyelid before creating bindings keeping to this pattern=2E You're overthinking this=2E C-x 4 is for stuff relating to windows=2E Of c= ourse that's the right place to put window movement commands=2E There's no = other logical place=2E >As such, it is perfectly logical to bind, say, ffap-other-window, in >this keymap, but not every command that marginally relates to window >management=2E You can choose to make that binding=2E I don't think it's a good default= =2E Adding a reasonable default does not hurt you=2E > >Windmove is not so important as ffap, to judge by the number of Ffap is a fringe feature=2E Window movement is fundamental to the whole sy= stem=2E >instances of each in the archives of help-gnu-emacs, and therefore >default keybindings for its commands can only be less justified=2E If >they were, there could also easily be a place for them far more rational >and less disruptive than C-x 4=2E Extending the domain of existing >keymaps is, whatever you think, a source of variance between the >expectations of old and new users, and deprives users of room for custom Again, you're making a general argument against adding any new bindings wh= atsoever=2E I don't think that's a good thing=2E The very same argument wou= ld have applied to the vc and project default bindings=2E >keybindings, again, since they experience a natural reluctance to >contradict the judgement of their superiors, expressed in the defaults So now we're going from keybindings to sociology? K=2E >they decide, so that the obligation of exercising this privilege wisely >and sparingly devolves on _ourselves_, who should constantly be at pains >to earn and deserve this respect=2E With all due respect, you are just >one user, and though many have concurred with your choice, yet none of >them have previously created the same set of bindings as yours=2E=20 Yes they have=2E Check the thread=2E In fact, it was Stefan who resurrecte= d the thread in the first place=2E > This >implies that the question of establishing default bindings for Windmove, >and more so your preferences for these bindings, was profoundly >uninteresting to everyone but yourself, and should not even have been >raised until it had attracted some more interest=2E > >So perhaps you might understand why it is upsetting to see our arguments >deflected with some vague dismissal of "general embargoes", or oratory You are, in fact, though ,making a general argument, then suggesting it ap= plies only to this one matter=2E That's called "special pleading" and is a = structurally invalid kind of discourse=2E >against "stasis", and appeals to such absolutely irrelevant matters as >Doom Emacs, or because it amounts to declaring that "users ought never >to rebind keys at all=2E" =20 I think Doom Emacs and Spacemacs are in bounds=2E They exist because core = Emacs has been insufficiently responsive to needs of real world users, and = this thread is this problem in microcosm=2E > Reverting to these general proclamations of >triumph gives the impression of being disinterested in constructive >communication and trying to understand your opponents' positions, and >being rather more inclined to simply heckle opponents into silence if >agreement is impossible=2E Seriously, ask yourself this simple question, >if the existence of default keybindings are truly no deterrent to >customization, why is cua-mode necessary for the majority of its users, >who simply need C-z rebound to undo and C-x to kill-region? And why >will the introduction of new keybindings not produce new habits in There is a difference between changing an existing binding (e=2Eg=2E C-z) = and installing a new binding where none currently exists=2E Merging the two= scenarios doesn't lead the conversation in a good place=2E=20