Why is C-d not bound to `delete-forward-char'?

Why is C-d not bound to `delete-forward-char'?

[Karl Fogel]

Does anyone know why C-d is bound to `delete-char' instead of
'delete-forward-char'?

If I run "C-h k C-d", I get the help for `delete-char', which says:

  | C-d runs the command delete-char (found in global-map), which is an
  | interactive built-in function in `C source code'.
  | 
  | It is bound to C-d.
  | 
  | (delete-char N &optional KILLFLAG)
  | 
  | Delete the following N characters (previous if N is negative).
  | Optional second arg KILLFLAG non-nil means kill instead (save in
  | kill ring).  Interactively, N is the prefix arg, and KILLFLAG is set
  | if N was explicitly specified.
  | 
  | The command `delete-forward-char' is preferable for interactive use,
  | e.g.  because it respects values of `delete-active-region' and
  | `overwrite-mode'.

According to that last paragraph, `delete-forward-char' would be preferable for interactive use, which implies that it should be on C-d instead, no?

Best,
-Karl

Re: Why is C-d not bound to `delete-forward-char'?

[Stefan Monnier]

> Does anyone know why C-d is bound to `delete-char' instead of
> 'delete-forward-char'?

Yes: because when delete-active-region was enabled by default, we
decided that C-d shouldn't delete the active region, so as to reduce the
pain of adaptation for old-timers.


        Stefan

Re: Why is C-d not bound to `delete-forward-char'?

[Karl Fogel]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>> Does anyone know why C-d is bound to `delete-char' instead of
>> 'delete-forward-char'?
>
>Yes: because when delete-active-region was enabled by default, we
>decided that C-d shouldn't delete the active region, so as to reduce the
>pain of adaptation for old-timers.

Thank you.

Would you like me to document that in the doc string for C-d, or would it be too distracting there?

(I think the doc string is a bit confusing in its current form, but maybe that's the lesser price here; not sure.)

-K