From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bikeshedding go! Why is unbound? Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:32:35 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87sjx7z7w4.fsf@telefonica.net> <83pqsbmf6j.fsf@gnu.org> <87k4ijz07h.fsf@telefonica.net> <2460D97DEA4047B3B9DF92C4A80981EF@us.oracle.com> <57BF13882D6E494286547F293FE9D03B@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1294864373 6355 80.91.229.12 (12 Jan 2011 20:32:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 20:32:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stuart Hacking , =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes , Lennart Borgman , Drew Adams , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Deniz Dogan Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 12 21:32:48 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd7N9-0004IJ-V7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:32:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39475 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pd7N8-0006SK-QP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:32:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54420 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pd7N0-0006Q5-8K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:32:39 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd7Mz-0000HC-Bv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:32:38 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:45434 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd7Mz-0000H7-92 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:32:37 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmEOAFKeLU1FxIbi/2dsb2JhbACkMQ10vCOFTASEaI4o X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,314,1291611600"; d="scan'208";a="87780649" Original-Received: from 69-196-134-226.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.196.134.226]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 12 Jan 2011 15:32:36 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id E09E158FC4; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:32:35 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Deniz Dogan's message of "Wed, 12 Jan 2011 16:54:30 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:134473 Archived-At: > I'm neither for nor against this proposal anymore, but I'd like it if > we keep the discussion going, so here are my thoughts. I don't really know what's the proposal anyway, so if someone can make it clear, and with a clear justification, that would be helpful. > 1. But there is a point to it! I may be wrong, but isn't M-f4 what > most desktop environments, e.g. KDE and Gnome, use to close a window > by default? That's irrelevant: these bindings come from the UI environment (the window-manager) and work regardless of what Emacs does (they send a `delete' X11 event, IIRC, which Emacs handles properly by closing the corresponding frame). I.e. these bindings already work right in Gnome and KDE, without having to bind M-f4 to anything inside Emacs. > 4. No one is saying we should bind M-f4 because it is unused. It's > just that it could have a very useful default binding for Windows > users which just happens to be unused today. Is M-f4 a standard binding in Windows, as it is in Gnome and KDE? Does it normally do the same as in Gnome/KDE? Does Emacs handle it correctly already by virtue of the key-binding being caught before it is passed on to Emacs's usual key handling, just as it happens in X11? Stefan