From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: C-z (Re: Two GTK related feature requests) Date: 29 Oct 2003 10:43:34 +0100 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87oew8so3g.fsf@cs.cmu.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1067420967 2474 80.91.224.253 (29 Oct 2003 09:49:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:49:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bob@rattlesnake.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 29 10:49:24 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AEmxA-0000sV-00 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 10:49:24 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AEmxA-0006kc-00 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 10:49:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AEmuA-0005Sy-Jw for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 04:46:18 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AEmsP-0005Bb-Cg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 04:44:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AEmrm-0003wQ-1S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 04:44:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [217.80.157.151] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.24) id 1AEmrh-0003gw-4t; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 04:43:45 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h9T9haR6009083 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 29 Oct 2003 10:43:36 +0100 Original-Received: (from dak@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h9T9hZ6f009079; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 10:43:35 +0100 Original-To: Karl Eichwalder In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 56 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:17539 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:17539 Karl Eichwalder writes: > Richard Stallman writes: > > > Basically I don't see any benefit in this change. If you want to > > redefine it, as a prefix key or any other way, you can already do > > that. > > Sure, but the current implementation will continue to confuse new > users. Pressing C-z by accident makes Emacs disappear out of the > blue. It is exactly what one expects on a tty. Now iconifying and stopping a process are different things, and on X, there is no C-z binding expected, too. On the other hand, on a tty one would expect C-c to end a program (well, some of us old geezers perhaps even the DEL key), and we need C-x C-c to do that, too. > And there is now way to cancel this command using C-g. > > At least, please add something to ask the user for confirmation: > > "Do you really want to inconify Emacs? (y/n)" That would defeat the idea of C-z in the first place. It turns out that we have different keybindings on the tty and X, anyway (in the first case, suspend-emacs, in the second case iconify-or-deiconify-frame. The first binding might be more or less what one expects, and people exposed to the command line will know exactly what happened and how to revert it, the second binding is a complete surprise and may take some effort to undo. In addition, it is completely arbitrary: deiconifying a frame will force the user to revert to his window manager's mechanisms of iconification (unless he can get keyboard focus on an iconified window, which again will require the cooperation of the window manager), so a method of iconifying that bypasses the window manager methods for it only gets you half way there. > All hackers who speak up in this thread confirmed that they are > using redefinition for C-z - thus ther must be something flawed with > the current key binding ;) I am not, but I am lazy. And I have yet to remember a single occasion when I indeed used C-z for iconifying a frame. I actually would consider it _more_ likely to use C-x C-z for that purpose, now that I think of it: it has a more Emacsy feeling to it. In contrast, C-z gets ingrained into your fingers as a "don't touch, ever, taboo" combination. Because it is too easy to type you learn to never type it. And thus C-z on X is more or less associated for me with "does weird things, avoid" rather than "iconifies". -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum