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: Tweaking t-m-m to make room for d-s-m Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:11:43 -0700 Message-ID: <6EAD7ADFA4B240D5BEF637C8212919D8@us.oracle.com> References: <87sk7pzqsp.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <87mxxw6c7b.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <20100326092833.19294vuz9efv5qg4@webmail.mnet-online.de> <33DBCF2DFF71401DB0861E66EC29ED2B@us.oracle.com> <5F1D87251C98412EADC1187ABFCC3E8D@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269645176 29851 80.91.229.12 (26 Mar 2010 23:12:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 23:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Lennart Borgman'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 27 00:12:51 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvIhu-0005aR-TB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 00:12:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47126 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NvIhu-0003co-4b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:12:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NvIho-0003cB-0e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:12:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39771 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NvIhl-0003bQ-FK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:12:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvIhj-0005af-Sp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:12:41 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet11.oracle.com ([148.87.113.123]:20746) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvIhj-0005aY-Gz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:12:39 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by rcsinet11.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o2QNCYwp011182 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 26 Mar 2010 23:12:36 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt353.oracle.com (acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o2Q4Z8dj019313; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 23:12:33 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt020.oracle.com by acsmt355.oracle.com with ESMTP id 115474421269645104; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:11:44 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/141.144.73.76) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:11:43 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcrNNFMe5RHN3fegRJiqzfILueRI/AAAaodw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Source-IP: acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090207.4BAD3F62.00A3:SCFMA4539814,ss=1,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:122742 Archived-At: > If it were not for the CUA keys the Emacs bindings were a good > choice... > > It is not hard at all to understand the choices. But if CUA keys had > been used before Emacs then I guess Emacs key bindings would have > included them and looked quite a bit different. There's where I disagree; that is, my guess is different from yours. I tried to address this by pointing out the large number of keys Emacs makes use of. Do you really think that, given that need (e.g. for easy to type prefix keys), Emacs would waste half a dozen of the simplest keys - keys that could and rightfully should be prefix keys - on operations like cut, copy, paste, find, and save? I cannot imagine that if designed today Emacs would make such a design choice. Those that think CUA mode and Viper are the best ways to use Emacs no doubt see things differently. I can say that if I _were_ convinced of that then I would have no trouble supporting a redesign of the keys we use. If the _only_ reason to keep the traditional Emacs keys were the silly weight of legacy, then I'd drop my support for that tradition in a heartbeat. Since you use CUA mode and Viper, you don't experience the advantage of the standard Emacs key choices, so that particular comparison is a wash for you. The gain of fitting in with the rest of the CUA world then tilts the balance - it becomes the most important consideration. [BTW - Yes, I recognize that the need for simple prefix keys is an argument for using `C-z' that way too. And I would support that change - I've even proposed it in the past, I believe. Until then, C-z for activate/deactivate sounds good to me.]