Re: Tweaking the output of `C-h b'

[Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Is the "prefix command" thing vital to know?  And should the ??'s be
> fixed?

I don't think the "prefix command" is vital to know, as the commands
will be listed individually later.  I say skip it.

It would be good to fix "??", yes.

> key             binding
> ---             -------
> DEL		backward-delete-char-untabify
> C-H-x		closure
> H-v		eval-current-buffer
>
> C-c d		closure
> C-c s		lars-patch-strip
>
> C-M-i		completion-at-point
> C-M-q		indent-pp-sexp
> C-M-x		eval-defun

Much better.  Perhaps put "closure" as "(closure)" or "[closure]" or
something to make it clear that this is not a command named "closure"?
Or perhaps "<closure>"?

> Or...  make that
>
> ---             -------
>
> into a thin line on graphical displays?  Makes the display even more
> compact.

Is the line necessary at all?  I think one line of spacing is okay
instead.

We could experiment with either bold or a different color for "key" and
"binding" and different combination of blank space/no blank space and
line/no line.

(Can we please capitalize "Key" and "Binding" while we're at it?)