Re: Suggestion: Mapping of M-g should be goto-line

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> >> >> For what it's worth I always thought C-c C-c was the natural binding
> >> >> for `compile' (or more generally for "here, I'm done editing, now
> >> >> process what I've edited").
> >> 
> >> > C-c C-c, however, is used by _many_ modes to mean "do the most common
> >> > thing", including modes where you want to be able to call "compile".
> >> 
> >> That might be, but I haven't come across such conflicts in my short life.
> >> What conflicts did you encounter?
> 
> > How about AUCTeX?  C-c C-c is the central dispatcher, and you
> > might want to use compile for running make-based compilations.
> 
> Isn't AUCTeX's central dispatcher supposed to be a "better compile"
> so that you don't need compile for those cases?

Better?  It substitutes for most of it, yes, but if you have
processes like weaving a noweb file or other autogenerated stuff,
AUCTeX can be a bit tedious.  For example, generating index and
glossary and so on often is done by Makefiles in more complicated
projects.

> At least I can't remember wishing to run `compile' when I was using
> AUCTeX.  And it can't be that hard to add `make' to the list of
> AUCTeX actions, can it?

Well, Gnus sends mail and articles with C-c C-c, calc finished
editing, PCL-vcs aborts a job, most shell modes send an interrupt
(don't tell me you never want to use compile from a shell), and so
on.  It's not exactly the least used key combination.

In fact, I am now sending this mail with it.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum