Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Stefan Monnier]

>     <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer
>     C-x 4 C-o                               display-buffer
>     <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame>    ido-display-buffer-other-frame
>     C-x 5 C-o                               display-buffer-other-frame

Nice.  But could we get rid of the duplication, as in:

    <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer
      C-x 4 C-o
    <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame>    ido-display-buffer-other-frame
      C-x 5 C-o

or maybe even make it fit on a single line, as in something like:

    <remap> <display-buffer> (C-x 4 C-o)             ido-display-buffer
    <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame> (C-x 5 C-o) ido-display-buffer-other-frame


-- Stefan

RE: [External] : Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Drew Adams]

See also bug #14084.

https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=14084

Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>>     <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer
>>     C-x 4 C-o                               display-buffer
>>     <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame>    ido-display-buffer-other-frame
>>     C-x 5 C-o                               display-buffer-other-frame
>
> Nice.  But could we get rid of the duplication, as in:
>
>     <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer
>       C-x 4 C-o
>     <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame>    ido-display-buffer-other-frame
>       C-x 5 C-o

Hm...  looks slightly like an error.

> or maybe even make it fit on a single line, as in something like:
>
>     <remap> <display-buffer> (C-x 4 C-o)             ido-display-buffer
>     <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame> (C-x 5 C-o) ido-display-buffer-other-frame

The problem is that these remap things are already very wide, and this
makes them even wider.

Hm...  What about just flipping things around and using our words?  That
would also make the lines shorter.  I.e.,

     C-x 4 C-o     ido-display-buffer
       (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer>.)
     C-x 5 C-o     ido-display-buffer-other-frame
       (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame>.)

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Stefan Kangas]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Hm...  What about just flipping things around and using our words?  That
> would also make the lines shorter.  I.e.,
>
>      C-x 4 C-o     ido-display-buffer
>        (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer>.)

To avoid saying "remap" twice, how about:

       (Remapped from display-buffer.)

We could dynamically put it on the same line or the next depending on
the length.

Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Michael Heerdegen]

Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> writes:

> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
>
> > Hm...  What about just flipping things around and using our words?  That
> > would also make the lines shorter.  I.e.,
> >
> >      C-x 4 C-o     ido-display-buffer
> >        (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer>.)
>
> To avoid saying "remap" twice, how about:
>
>        (Remapped from display-buffer.)

I would prefer

  (via <remap> <display-buffer>)

instead if we want to get rid of the doubled word "remap".  For some
reason I find your version harder to understand.

Maybe because there are a lot of components involved: the explained key
binding, the remapping key binding, the command remapped, and the
"target" command - and it's not trivial to get them into the right order
in my head to understand what is going on.

Michael.

Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Stefan Monnier]

> Hm...  What about just flipping things around and using our words?
> That would also make the lines shorter.  I.e.,
>
>      C-x 4 C-o     ido-display-buffer
>        (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer>.)
>      C-x 5 C-o     ido-display-buffer-other-frame
>        (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame>.)

Sounds good to me.  I don't have an opinion on the specific wording
within the parens, but I'll mention that a single `remap display-buffer`
can cause various key bindings to be remapped, which is why I suggested

    <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer
      C-x 4 C-o

which naturally generalizes to things like:

    <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer
      C-x 4 C-o, C-c C-o C-o

Also, a remap entry can have 0 corresponding keybindings, in which case
we should keep something like

    <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer


-- Stefan

Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Po Lu]

Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes:

> I would prefer
>
>   (via <remap> <display-buffer>)
>
> instead if we want to get rid of the doubled word "remap".  For some
> reason I find your version harder to understand.

I think Lars' version is better, since it both makes clear how the key
binding was set, and what <remap> means.

Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Michael Heerdegen]

Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> writes:

> I think Lars' version is better, since it both makes clear how the key
> binding was set, and what <remap> means.

I'm also ok with Lars' version - would remove the the final dot though,
like

     C-x 4 C-o     ido-display-buffer
       (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer>)
     C-x 5 C-o     ido-display-buffer-other-frame
       (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame>)

Michael.

Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes:

> I'm also ok with Lars' version - would remove the the final dot though,
> like
>
>      C-x 4 C-o     ido-display-buffer
>        (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer>)
>      C-x 5 C-o     ido-display-buffer-other-frame
>        (Remapped via <remap> <display-buffer-other-frame>)

I've now gone with this.  I agree with Stefan that it would be nice to
avoid the repetition of "remap", but the variants suggested all seem a
bit obscure to me -- i.e., they don't really explain what we're trying
to convey unless you already know about remapped commands, while
spelling it out in this way should give the users a hint they can look
up in the manual.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Re: master f0cd91067d: Improve `C-h b' output for remapped commands.

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> Sounds good to me.  I don't have an opinion on the specific wording
> within the parens, but I'll mention that a single `remap display-buffer`
> can cause various key bindings to be remapped, which is why I suggested
>
>     <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer
>       C-x 4 C-o
>
> which naturally generalizes to things like:
>
>     <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer
>       C-x 4 C-o, C-c C-o C-o

Oh yeah, I only show the first binding now.  Hm...  On the other hand,
we do show those other bindings (for `display-buffer') elsewhere in the
buffer, but it'd be nice to show them all here, too.

> Also, a remap entry can have 0 corresponding keybindings, in which case
> we should keep something like
>
>     <remap> <display-buffer>                ido-display-buffer

Yes, those are displayed as before.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no