> On Jun 6, 2019, at 23:37, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> From: Clément Pit-Claudel >> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 09:26:54 -0400 >> >>> Why is it useful to have different behavior on GUI and TTY frames? >> >> It's not so much that it's useful to have different behavior; rather, there are limitations that only TTY frames suffer from, and if you mostly or always use GUI frames, it's nice not to suffer from these limitations. > > That's not the same. C-[ being the same as ESC is very basic, Well, for some people, obviously not for everybody. My issue was understanding *why* it was the case. The history with ascii is cute but really makes just as much sense to me as if I had to enter unicode escaped sequences in emacs to be able to type Japanese. > like C-g, so having to remember that it might not work on GUI frames would be a PITA at least for me. ? Which is not what I'd like to have here. What I'd like to have is some documentation about that issue in the Emacs manual *and* a documented way to override that behavior on my side. >> So I guess keeping a consistent experience in TTY and GUI frames isn't as important for me as improving the experience in GUI frames. > > IMO, being able to bind C-[ to something else is not an important > feature, not enough to break the compatibility. What compatibility would that break ? If I were to bind C-[ in GUI emacs to something that I find more convenient than ESC in that position, how would that break something ? > But that's me. That could be me too if you explained the issue in a more intelligible way. Now I see that some things are explained in "Named ASCII Control Characters" in the manual. That part definitely needs some explicit wording for non nerds. Jean-Christophe Helary ----------------------------------------------- http://mac4translators.blogspot.com @brandelune