From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Concern about new binding. Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2021 09:54:49 +0200 Message-ID: <83zh0josom.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo.ref@Ergus> <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo@Ergus> <87zh0mmr54.fsf@gmail.com> <87tuqunw6q.fsf@telefonica.net> <835z3a5miu.fsf@gnu.org> <87lfc6nvlt.fsf@telefonica.net> <8335ye5lhj.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2g54yd0.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="29293"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 05 08:55:44 2021 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 1l7vxw-0007Vt-0d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 08:55:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58218 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7vxu-0004un-VB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 02:55:42 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44368) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7vx8-0004Px-Qf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 02:54:54 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:55935) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7vx7-00022Z-23; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 02:54:53 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:1121 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1l7vwz-0003TO-Kb; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 02:54:46 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Richard Stallman on Fri, 05 Feb 2021 00:46:12 -0500) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:263947 Archived-At: > From: Richard Stallman > Cc: eliz@gnu.org, ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2021 00:46:12 -0500 > > I think this shoula also apply to considering a feature > that would be an incompatibility, or would voilate > established conventions and patterns. > > Incompatibilities include changing the behavior of a series of keys > which isn't erroneous (for instance, C-x o o or C-x o ,). > > An example of violating a pattern is defining C-x followed by a > capital letter to mean something different from the corresponding > lower-case letter. I think keeping these patterns could be a good idea, but if we want these patterns not to be violated, we need to document them first. Right now, none of these two patterns are documented (AFAICT), and at least for me it was a surprise to learn that they are patterns we are supposed to try not to break.