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: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 15:45:29 +0200 Message-ID: <87zhmto6fa.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <08AC8151-5911-40FA-8B20-818B839D00AB@traduction-libre.org> <86h892nk2g.fsf@zoho.eu> <9379C01B-80E3-49DD-B830-46CED773DC2C@traduction-libre.org> <83lfydrkde.fsf@gnu.org> <874l51q0s4.fsf@telefonica.net> <83ef45rdij.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="85251"; 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 Fri Jun 07 15:52:50 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.47]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hZFIX-000Lsj-RH for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 15:52:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51336 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hZFIP-0007eL-Sw for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 09:52:41 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42140) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hZFBd-0002wv-G6 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 09:45:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hZFBc-0007pT-CN for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 09:45:41 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=56498 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hZFBc-0007lC-58 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 09:45:40 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hZFBW-000E0W-Rb for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 15:45:34 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Cancel-Lock: sha1:oflJdw6+eojPf/4QzNjvSNVrPls= 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:120803 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> >> What I'd like to have, is the ability to bind C-[ just like I can >> >> bind C-], in GUI emacs (since console emacs seems to not allow to do >> >> that easily). >> > >> > Stefan explained up-thread (though perhaps on emacs-devel and not >> > here) what needs to be done for that, so I'm unsure what are your >> > difficulties in this matter. Maybe describe what you tried in more >> > detail? >> >> The OP is explaining himself quite clearly. > > I thought so was I. > >> There is no reason whatsoever to disallow binding C-[ on GUI Emacs >> the same way you can bind any other key. > > My understanding of what Stefan wrote was that this is NOT disallowed. The key phrase is "the same way you can bind any other key." Stefan's suggestion does not comply with that. > There's no reason to chastise me, I'm no one to chastise anyone. Sometimes I'm a bit too dry. > even if it turns out I've misunderstood what Stefan said. That's why I > asked Jean-Christophe to describe what he tried -- to clear up any > possible misunderstandings, including mine. One thing that I'll like to know is why the hard restriction about C-[/C-i exists at all. It is understandable that the default bindings mimic what you get on the terminal, but forcing the user to jump through hoops to rebind those keys helps no one. It looks as if a primitive implementation detail remained like a living fossil to this days on the C code base. I suspect that it is related to how several Emacs hackers reacted to the question posed by the OP: as if he were obviously wrong when requesting that C-[ to do anything else. It seems that, on this topic, there are two camps: those tty-minded and those gui-minded.