From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Concern about new binding. Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2021 09:37:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo.ref@Ergus> <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo@Ergus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5633"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 03 10:38:37 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 1l7EcO-0001NN-Jk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 10:38:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59920 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7EcN-0006VJ-Kc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 04:38:35 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57188) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7Eb2-0005HR-0H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 04:37:13 -0500 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:34532) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7Eb0-0001dM-B1; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 04:37:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1612345028; bh=TZRhl1C4Q1hpyiSQUw3raiH1GQ7d2bF0GVd5DVeF700=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=S4hBQIGC4fDIYoFSEnVgnCnNe3mevdx8KZ0akBMd/hHKxSyCDISbHTCaqUC5Koz7s LVFNjYjMcSon8z7um8FkNaIEVS6xTbGI8r9LsrxqL9urNNUvu5SBm6YXi807k70IaY DI+RlnDWIpkKWjd+kNZsPNUwJ0JJo5WKe4R0a0doRrAQ+bTE8INROheQyiV6xkLy3G jw5TdZLcGhjCusoS7YgKRrXLU2yNIG0gBcKIsVJa+oCMHQcL9wvSHH94e4EzLPj7PW 3U4n4RfWCZWqiWgHBW2XmSfG+aIrE+5e71Efyxt3v8aCDfRvwnNtjghVZZVO3dFmcA fHweMmAEIr0RA== In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.142.160.155; envelope-from=gregory@heytings.org; helo=heytings.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, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:263781 Archived-At: >> In a recent commit I see that the C-x g binding was taken for >> revert-buffer. > > I see another disadvantage in that binding: revert-buffer is a drastic > operation, so we should not make it easier. I think it is wiser not to > put it on a key -- which is why I never did. > It's true that it is a drastic operation, but it asks for confirmation, and it can be undone. An additional security measure would be to disable it by default: (put 'revert-buffer 'disabled t).