On Jun 6, 2019, at 23:37, Eli Zaretskii <
eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
From: Clément Pit-Claudel <cpitclaudel@gmail.com>
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 ?
That could be me too if you explained the issue in a more intelligible way.