From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Unuseful keybindings Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:27:46 -0800 Message-ID: <5D7D686F0451473081716BAAE7264CC6@us.oracle.com> References: <87sj73qzvl.fsf@gmail.com> <87623zquvw.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1355876878 23837 80.91.229.3 (19 Dec 2012 00:27:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 00:27:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Andreas Schwab' , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Mathias Dahl'" , "'Thierry Volpiatto'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 19 01:28:13 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tl7W8-0006NB-Q5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 01:28:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48459 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tl7Vv-0003K6-7w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 19:27:59 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35323) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tl7Vt-0003Jo-05 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 19:27:58 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tl7Vr-0006Qk-Js for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 19:27:56 -0500 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:23994) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tl7Vr-0006Qe-Cg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 19:27:55 -0500 Original-Received: from ucsinet21.oracle.com (ucsinet21.oracle.com [156.151.31.93]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id qBJ0RqBp004870 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 19 Dec 2012 00:27:53 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by ucsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qBJ0Rq6i023047 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 19 Dec 2012 00:27:52 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt101.oracle.com (abhmt101.oracle.com [141.146.116.53]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id qBJ0RpHO003681; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 18:27:51 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.173.243) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:27:51 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: Ac3dVkDvA7nwI9+yRky7VIR37hTVFgAJopcQ X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: ucsinet21.oracle.com [156.151.31.93] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:155665 Archived-At: > Can't you just rebind these keys? I mean, you would > have to do that anyway, to use them for your purposes, right? Yes, but the fact that users can do that is never a good enough reason _on its own_ for Emacs Dev to sacrifice a particular key sequence for a default binding. For one thing, the very fact that there exists a default key binding sometimes dissuades libraries from binding the key sequence, because some user will holler bloody hell that the library steps on a default key binding, even if using the library is a voluntary act, and even if the user can override the library binding. No, there is nothing wrong with a user or a library doing that, but some people overly respect what they see as the established order, even though Emacs points out in its doc that you are free to customize etc. Somehow, default key bindings can tend, for some people, to take on a sacred aura. An additional rationale was given in this case, however, I believe. IIRC (excuse me if I remember incorrectly), this was it: many people use it outside Emacs for the same (or a similar) thing. I find that particular rationale quite weak, if it stands alone. Yes, it has _some_ merit, but there can be much stronger, internal-consistency or user-behavior reasons for Emacs to bind a given key sequence by default. For one thing, a key such as `f11' is repeatable, so it is preferable not to waste it on a command/action that is not repeatable by just holding down the key. Most possible key sequences (e.g. `C-x r l') are not repeatable, and we should make best use of those that are. Repeatable keys are a scarce resource, to be treasured and put to wise use. We first went down this silly path when we bound `f3' and `f4' - not too long ago. That was a big mistake, IMHO. Or was `f10' prior? Well, you could even argue that the first such abuse was binding `f1', but there are a lot more people who know and use `f1' for help outside Emacs than there are that use `f11'. Plus, `f1' is precisely for getting help. There is a much stronger case to be made for sacrificing `f1' than `f3', `f4', `f10', or `f11', IMO. It used to be that Emacs made an effort to stay away from binding function keys. Alas, that boat sailed long ago. >> You don't have to use them. > > Sure but this make the prefix f11 unavailable for more > useful purpose...