From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Ctrl-[ ? Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 21:40:07 +0200 Message-ID: <87d0jnooh4.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <83lfydrkde.fsf@gnu.org> <874l51q0s4.fsf@telefonica.net> <83ef45rdij.fsf@gnu.org> <87zhmto6fa.fsf@telefonica.net> <20190607163017.GA32029@tuxteam.de> <96B116FC-8007-4C42-9AE6-585530D0C76E@comcast.net> <87muisor2h.fsf@telefonica.net> <20190608084404.GB28228@tuxteam.de> <87h890ns41.fsf@telefonica.net> <83pnnonr15.fsf@gnu.org> <20190608135853.GA4323@tuxteam.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="79823"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 08 21:50:19 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hZhM2-000Kdo-Ub for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Jun 2019 21:50:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60188 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hZhM1-00085m-Ro for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:50:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41326) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hZhCS-0000CX-DJ for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:40:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hZhCQ-0007yU-E0 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:40:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=41616 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hZhCK-0007uY-Gn for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:40:18 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hZhCI-000AJO-0o for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Jun 2019 21:40:14 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Cancel-Lock: sha1:HOdIh2E0CKrhELj8DISWPmktJBw= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:120843 Archived-At: writes: > On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 04:30:14PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> > From: Óscar Fuentes >> > Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:54 +0200 >> > >> > Nobody is asking for a change on the default bindings, what we are >> > saying it that the user should be allowed to set the binding the >> > same way he does for any other binding. >> >> If you or someone else believe they know enough about the Emacs >> keyboard input processing to propose its redesign which will satisfy >> the above requirement [...] No, I don't know enough. I just looked at keyboard.c for several minutes and can only understand your cautions about touching what it seems a pile of bugfixes on top of a stack of hacks to deal with quirky terminals shoehorning new paradigms like guis into a pre-existing tty-based design. Oh, and the interactions with the display engine, as if handling terminals were not complex enough on itself. >> Current situation is nowhere near such expertise. Suffices it to say >> that several times during the recent years when we needed to make >> seemingly-simple changes and fixes in that code, no one had the >> courage to approve such changes. For some of them, it later turned >> out that we broke some subtle but important use cases, for others we >> still have our fingers crossed. So please don't expect any >> significant redesigns in that any time soon, as long as all we do is >> vent steam here. We have an enormously complex piece of software on >> our hands, and we have no better choice than going the "inconvenient" >> ways when we want to rebind an unusual key. > > Well said. The only one stepping forward with some code was Stefan, > and personally, I find it a bit discouraging What I find discouraging is this phrase on the above quoted message: >> ... Suffices it to say that several times during the recent years >> when we needed to make seemingly-simple changes and fixes in that >> code, no one had the courage to approve such changes. I'm sure that that is not Eli's intention, but encouraging it is not. > that folks just keep > saying what "Emacs Should Do" without investing much effort into > understanding what's there and what other users need/want. Care to explain how the proposed change would take away from you? > Software development is a collective effort, and it takes listening > as well as talking, I think. I listened as hard as I can, and still don't understand why you react this way to this issue, when several times we explicitly said that nothing would change on the default behavior.