From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.. Date: 28 Aug 2002 17:54:40 +0900 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87lm6xiruh.fsf@computer.localdomain> <5xu1liwmu6.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <200208261526.g7QFQX624783@rum.cs.yale.edu> <5xu1lgu1e4.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <200208271621.g7RGLNm30516@rum.cs.yale.edu> <5xhehfe3aj.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1030524950 23648 127.0.0.1 (28 Aug 2002 08:55:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 08:55:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Stefan Monnier" , "D. Goel" , emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17jyc8-000699-00 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:55:48 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17jz7q-0006Nb-00 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 11:28:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17jydT-00009x-00; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 04:57:11 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17jybt-000061-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 04:55:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17jybr-00005p-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 04:55:32 -0400 Original-Received: from tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.214]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17jybq-00005d-00; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 04:55:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mailgate4.nec.co.jp ([10.7.69.197]) by TYO201.gate.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W01080315) with ESMTP id g7S8tKG19002; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:55:20 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mailsv.nec.co.jp (mailgate51.nec.co.jp [10.7.69.190]) by mailgate4.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) with ESMTP id g7S8tK505743; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:55:20 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp ([10.30.114.133]) by mailsv.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W-MAILSV-NEC) with ESMTP id g7S8sfe04903; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:55:18 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (mcspd15 [10.30.114.174]) by mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (8.10.2+Sun/3.7Wlsi_mx_6.0) with ESMTP id g7S8sfs19256; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:54:41 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (Postfix, from userid 31295) id 86DD736F2; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:54:40 +0900 (JST) Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: <5xhehfe3aj.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> Original-Lines: 51 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:7030 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:7030 storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > Note that where the old (and still available) bindings use separate > commands for ending and calling a keyboard macro, the new bindings > merges the ending and calling onto the same key. So kmacro just needs > two [function] keys rather than three. I think the merging of `end-kmacro-definition' and `execute-kmacro' is clever and useful. > With the new bindings this is quite different: > > F3 C-e ; C-n F4 F4 F4 F4 > > That's just 11 key strokes - of which the last 4 are on the same key - > so it more like 8 individual key strokes and a little extra tapping on > the last key. And only three modifier keys are used. I think you're obsessing way too much on `keystrokes'. I suspect the mental overhead of being careful to make your actions repeatable, completely swamps the savings of two or three strokes. [Also, for a touch-typist, it's probably _faster_ to type `C-x (' than it is to type F3 -- and the former is clearly easier to remember!] > I'm providing a default binding which makes a _big_ difference in > usability for the average user. You haven't shown that. I'm sure you love this system, but as you said, you've used it for 10 years, so I think you're really not a very good judge. Your idea of an easy-to-hit combined end-execute key _is_ very good, and probably worth adding; but surely we can come up with something better than a function key! Hell, why not just make `C-x e' end the macro as well as executing it, and then use Stefan's idea of allowing the `e' to be repeated indefinitely [or something similar]? That would gain most of the savings of your approach, while maintaining the existing easy-to-remember bindings for macros. > If _you_ don't need it or want it ... just rebind it. We shouldn't just add every new feature that comes to mind, without giving it a bit of debate. Saying `well you can rebind it' is rather lame... -Miles -- `Cars give people wonderful freedom and increase their opportunities. But they also destroy the environment, to an extent so drastic that they kill all social life' (from _A Pattern Language_)