From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Colascione Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2024 12:47:35 -0400 Message-ID: <950C0DB5-A049-473C-ACB2-2F474DA770F1@dancol.org> References: <875xto7lbn.fsf@dancol.org> <86ed8ce2mh.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <8634orbvxk.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5466"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android Cc: Stefan Kangas , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 02 18:48:52 2024 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 1sOggV-0001Gu-Ry for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 18:48:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sOgfc-0001y6-JR; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 12:47:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sOgfX-0001xp-Pu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 12:47:54 -0400 Original-Received: from dancol.org ([2600:3c01:e000:3d8::1]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sOgfV-0002QI-Mr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 12:47:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dancol.org; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID: References:In-Reply-To:Subject:CC:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=6XnzR6JV86vTw8icaobHYIqh/Mhi/U2aLdZrRym7ygQ=; b=l5VFUh+xKbSDgmar6ZZaTGczc3 uAyHpSGex8pNf7Q+XWulLkGcvGkH0FYNJZsb5WLhdDNll+Hmaax+cA2faRM4nz6rWUOGSVNpf16h4 X0QgGAycI1aobxyA8ntjskp74RAylGUqsGhZWrgKQzj2Tuw7KqWLaFZuMo+WnwGqIS6EuIWfD5UoY 186QYAwl5Zw1i3npWEIpIvMcqEcEVk14AuiC9QgzIPVuRc+XTrqDvF8MKh4VWAKWNjMf1AXj02VKn sqIe35R307bob7gBQYp24ZlXi3cHBzzxBcpfXJu0Eg+iBE02++OaguVnnCD0zvI+WLle+RuHbE+Yd vfe5JOdg==; Original-Received: from [2600:1006:b19c:76c9:0:48:cacc:2901] (port=44428 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by dancol.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sOgfN-00041S-FR; Tue, 02 Jul 2024 12:47:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <8634orbvxk.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2600:3c01:e000:3d8::1; envelope-from=dancol@dancol.org; helo=dancol.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:321187 Archived-At: On July 2, 2024 12:32:07 PM EDT, Juri Linkov wrote: >>>> +@kindex C-x 4 DOWN >>> >>>I can't believe someone might want to use such long key sequences >>>for one of the most frequent actions=2E It's even longer than >>>'C-x o' it's supposed to improve=2E >> >> It's an improvement on C-x o for some use cases because it's more >> predictable, not because it's shorter=2E Besides, the key sequence >> isn't even that hard to type=2E Have you tried it? > >Press and hold the Control key, press the x key on the bottom row, >release the Control key, press the 4 key on the top row, press >an arrow key on the keypad=2E OTOH, with a modifier: press and >hold the modifier key, press an arrow, release the modifier key=2E Counting keystrokes gives a misleading picture of key binding complexity= =2E Try it yourself: C-x 4 LEFT=2E The left hand invokes the familiar C-x, = then glides up to hit 4 with no further coordination=2E The right hand hits= an arrow key as another familiar action=2E C-x 4 LEFT might seem long, but= I find it a lot more fluid than things like M-j in practice=2E > >>> I think there are no better keys >>>for switching windows than arrows with a modifier=2E >> >> I use these and they're fine=2E The problem with binding a modifier >> with bare arrow keys is that all sorts of customizations and modes >> bind these already=2E C-x 4 is vacant, logical, and short enough=2E > >So you personally use a modifier, and propose a long key sequence >that nobody will use? No=2E I use the keys I've proposed=2E > >>>Since all keybindings in the 'C-x 4' keymap are for commands >>>that display a buffer in another window, 'C-x 4 LEFT/=2E=2E=2E' >>>could do the same to display the buffer of the next command >>>in the specified window=2E >> >> Such a command doesn't exist and doesn't sound particularly useful to m= e=2E > >It's 'windmove-display-default-keybindings'=2E It's less frequently used >than 'windmove-default-keybindings', so a longer key sequence >like 'C-x 4 DOWN' would be fine for 'windmove-display-in-direction'=2E That seems like a lot of extra steps for something conceptually simple=2E > >> Putting window management under C-x 4 makes logical sense=2E > >We already have a new keymap for window management under C-x w=2E >Whereas C-x 4 is for buffer display=2E Therefore it makes more sense >to put 'windmove-display-default-keybindings' under C-x 4=2E