From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 04:01:37 +0300 Message-ID: <644140db-9ad5-44b5-a598-e7d2edb7d42b@gutov.dev> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="19542"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cc: Stefan Kangas , Stefan Monnier , Daniel Colascione , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 02 03:02:17 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sORuT-0004tc-0t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 03:02:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sORu1-0002s5-UX; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 21:01:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sORtx-0002ra-2u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 21:01:45 -0400 Original-Received: from fhigh6-smtp.messagingengine.com ([103.168.172.157]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sORtu-0006pj-Ay for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 21:01:44 -0400 Original-Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailfhigh.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 283BE11400DD; Mon, 1 Jul 2024 21:01:41 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 01 Jul 2024 21:01:41 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gutov.dev; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1719882101; x=1719968501; bh=dhWE8iBWjQ0B8S13k4c2oxWhjal4qrRGrVYsSjeztus=; b= bez55muIA2OveZeE9PG3e2lXU4G+WPkkGzAjneC92CiuO5d3oGemhJjU+Bcnu2mi u7v2pHRvx6nzcpf0/TMlU9EMUGP3qlBowW2cvZbbz4BmKzWq2XXnf01w0gVr+amP bnStL4112+TrRnC/Agf1JsBt94cHjnWXjiFyC+KbczZLntrpeh9P5zm7Sc026M5l E7V+4jGsLuqmCAIKRlP9Soaxgy8cyzCiLS8S5cjszdMXN1YIwuwno3DGqySc8xth izZiHwU8d42IFJhqnCtjtCTJWbmhMVlJRsr2rSd+sVA7oblDvXHPZ8uVwAXGII4O nqjR0H1VVFpsudk5fqsqMA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1719882101; x= 1719968501; bh=dhWE8iBWjQ0B8S13k4c2oxWhjal4qrRGrVYsSjeztus=; b=t PZPDDzAVlENhaZNbC3TjZAVVmyEJuHa/9b6UgnHe590hECdyihcyTLjh/bALvmnU N76LibVDFUhPciH+hrop4awE9zy+MwJ3zuCxcjQE87hKqvEy07hk3o7BS6tYGZj0 2jv1B9ajNamTtKj3UsKvDjfX8zZq1k+bS0849FBSVxSVZvVXHGX+bOfcUe2W5wXx raJvWXKNEwY/k9/uYlJDGJ8CGxj/JCPrekqsCbN1KUdrBNnv60c/Es2uzCFkMRTA PaBJI0e4zmz+4+OhUFkVVy1rL2W8fOnR2TNhaTecanrCxWPRUJNA9pwc8X4kasjc Rr3XKVkrWEP62Pck9S+gQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrudeggdegudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefkffggfgfuvfevfhfhjggtgfesthejredttddvjeenucfhrhhomhepffhmihht rhihucfiuhhtohhvuceoughmihhtrhihsehguhhtohhvrdguvghvqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeetudeljeegheetgfehgeejkeeuhedvveeikeeufedtvddtveefhfdvveegudej heenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegumh hithhrhiesghhuthhovhdruggvvh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i0e71465a:Fastmail Original-Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 1 Jul 2024 21:01:39 -0400 (EDT) Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=103.168.172.157; envelope-from=dmitry@gutov.dev; helo=fhigh6-smtp.messagingengine.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:321075 Archived-At: Hi Alan, On 02/07/2024 00:24, Alan Mackenzie wrote: >> People screaming "backward compatibility" for each and every reason can >> indeed be a problem. > > Yes, but it's a difficult problem. I would be screaming if somebody > suggested removing the bindings C-o or C-M-o, for example. I use these > all the time. But if I were the only user of them, it would be > difficult to argue for their retention in the default key map. An addition of a binding should pose less immediate danger than a removal of one, shouldn't it? And okay, we might want to take care in adding bindings because later it would be hard to remove. But we are unlikely to be in 100% agreement for every such addition. It seems impossible to make every new addition "ideal" in that sense. > On the other hand, C-x w h (highlight-regexp) already has a "more > modern" binding M-s h r, so although I wouldn't be enthused about the > removal of C-x w h, I wouldn't object to it either. That's how I tend to think about this as well. >> We should be able to change default key bindings more freely than we do now. > > Yes, but... Every time we do this, we're upsetting _sombody_'s work > flow. I don't see any way of getting this increased freedom to change. Somebody mentioned telemetry in this thread earlier, apparently it was not received well. But some consistent way of polling users might help. Sometime later when we establish one.