Re: DEL vs Backspace

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

Lars Ingebrigtsen [2021-04-25 18:49:43] wrote:
> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>> Maybe we should inverse this mapping.  Similarly for RET-vs-return and
>> TAB-vs-tab.

[ And I forgot to mention ESC-vs-escape in the list.  ]

>> Another benefit in the long run would be to free C-i and C-m for the
>> users to bind as they please in GUI frames.
>
> Sounds good to me.

Note that beside the question of whether we want it or not, there's the
question of how to do it without breaking (too much) existing code and
use cases.

Maybe we could start by adding a DEL => backspace remapping *without*
removing the backspace => DEL remapping?

Still, as modes start changing their keymaps to place bindings on
`backspace` we'll end up with situations where a minor modes has
a mapping for DEL and the major mode has a different mapping for
`backspace` and they'll end up chosen based on the incidental "tty or
GUI?" distinction rather than based on the minor modes bindings's
precedence over major modes's.

This said, such problems already exist since a fair number of modes
mistakently bind commands to `tab` instead of TAB or to `return` instead
of RET, leading to overriding minor-vs-major precedence rules.


        Stefan