From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Corwin Brust Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Moving kbd to subr.el Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2021 13:10:03 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20211004081724.6281.11798@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87sfx10xs6.fsf@gnus.org> <87h7dfpjn3.fsf@gnus.org> <31b2f1e94178d73e5f05@heytings.org> <83fsszfnjw.fsf@gnu.org> <31b2f1e9412c9002c8f4@heytings.org> <875ytvpgnn.fsf@gnus.org> <838ryqftlh.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgr487cj.fsf@gnus.org> <875ytrzg13.fsf@posteo.net> <87bl3jjdfw.fsf@gnus.org> <87lf2mwl68.fsf@posteo.net> <874k99f8ev.fsf@gnus.org> <87sfwtrttu.fsf@posteo.net> <87mtn1cdbh.fsf@gnus.org> <87o87hrte4.fsf@posteo.net> <878rylccyi.fsf@gnus.org> <87fssssz57.fsf@posteo.net> <87v91oc49k.fsf@gnus.org> <877de2a746.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000048bce05cf1d28c3" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="12286"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: philipk@posteo.net, Richard Stallman , Emacs developers , gregory@heytings.org, Stefan Kangas , Eli Zaretskii To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 24 20:13:33 2021 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 1mehzv-0002zq-Qe for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 20:13:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34050 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mehzu-0001km-0h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 14:13:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34288) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mehwr-0006dO-PX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 14:10:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ed1-f52.google.com ([209.85.208.52]:42816) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mehwo-0002Vf-5P; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 14:10:20 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ed1-f52.google.com with SMTP id w15so9195846edc.9; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 11:10:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zaAn+5PXYF/CyybnH8SpcBiEPk2Y54Kxp5Y7mYdzmC4=; b=LRBHAaJo5zmz9tUq6Un33QceD4phtXFAHoMKk0wz0oEgxpXm5QRcRAkSIZt8n29yPH UXbwfQBB6FQkq2C6TCe8FpEpy66HePEgqEHmu8JaO58/JAUisF5rdFM6WQu7DFNle3jG 0Mj5Q+D63XEcYrFu//zLm/0xxHFN7MOat5jwnm9wJuGQP5M/iWpK5fK+If9SwGks4zjN CadT1K/bM/N8QPEL7x6URKnZcVpWV7ZL/o/2OlckwdlS44f1xzJ/ODc/wEMhydblavk4 0sjsCvVcqD5TWkrmLLbM5BGHn+M6ZR4P6K3xM4nhKmw1WO9gThvVzSzV0OVXifEf0MGg k4OQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532USnq4BoRxrqS7zbsLB19WwMWxa95DLGy6anyHlasMBTOwy9Tp PPOtH6fxHFY4H1i4ZeU6vhD3GEqSG/abhyVp9e0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzitOSUXr0iLBxHaGvTIGfcK/zUCXCmiP7Hag2rzl/cwBMrYTLacL9elJ49XKlux46F+aUrBazl2Oipduv/XlA= X-Received: by 2002:a50:f103:: with SMTP id w3mr19225506edl.259.1635099015938; Sun, 24 Oct 2021 11:10:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <877de2a746.fsf@gnus.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.208.52; envelope-from=mplscorwin@gmail.com; helo=mail-ed1-f52.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:277675 Archived-At: --000000000000048bce05cf1d28c3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Emacs devs! On Sun, Oct 24, 2021, 08:24 Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Richard Stallman writes: > > > We can move `kbd' to subr.el as is, for short-term convenience, and we > > can leave it there permanently if that's useful. But that doesn't > > mean we have to adopt `kbd' syntax as our permanent new key binding > > syntax. > > > > Let's not rush to decide that new syntax! > > We're not rushing -- `describe-key' has been around for quite a while, > and that's the syntax we're using. > Apropos rushing.. AFAIK bind-keys (from use-package) is fairly stable. Discussion of it in this thread fell by the wayside, I think. Is there a reason for that I may have missed? (I'm traveling these last few days and may well be poorly following the lists from my mobile.) Are there design goals at stake here that bind-keys leaves aside? And, assuming there, would someone be so kind as to enumerate the design goals for a new keyboard binding layer? Can compatibility with bind-keys be considered as (at least) nice to have in such a list? My sense is that quite a number of people use it (via use-package). In fact, I would tend to assume use-package's bind-key is the most popular/well-used not-yet-supported-in-core means of setting up complex user defined key-bindings. If these (data-free) assertions are true, supporting (whether or not actually using) bind-key may be preferable to 'socializing' the rationale for different heuristics. --000000000000048bce05cf1d28c3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Emacs devs!

On Sun, Oct 24, 2021, 08:24 Lars Ingebri= gtsen <larsi@gnus.org> wrote:
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wr= ites:

> We can move `kbd' to subr.el as is, for short-term convenience, an= d we
> can leave it there permanently if that's useful.=C2=A0 But that do= esn't
> mean we have to adopt `kbd' syntax as our permanent new key bindin= g
> syntax.
>
> Let's not rush to decide that new syntax!

We're not rushing -- `describe-key' has been around for quite a whi= le,
and that's the syntax we're using.

Apropos rushing..

AFAIK bind-keys (from use-package) is= fairly stable.=C2=A0 Discussion of it in this thread fell by the wayside, = I think.=C2=A0 Is there a reason for that I may have missed?=C2=A0 (I'm= traveling these last few days and may well be poorly following the lists f= rom my mobile.)

Are ther= e design goals at stake here that bind-keys leaves aside?=C2=A0 And, assumi= ng there, would someone be so kind as to enumerate the design goals for a n= ew keyboard binding layer?

Can compatibility with bind-keys be considered as (at least) nice to hav= e in such a list?

My sen= se is that quite a number of people use it (via use-package).=C2=A0 In fact= , I would tend to assume use-package's bind-key is the most popular/wel= l-used not-yet-supported-in-core means of setting up complex user defined k= ey-bindings.=C2=A0=C2=A0

If these (data-free) assertions are true, supporting (whether or not actua= lly using) bind-key may be preferable to 'socializing' the rational= e for different heuristics.
--000000000000048bce05cf1d28c3--