From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Alfred M. Szmidt" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs learning curve Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:52:38 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4C3B6A8A.80105@gmx.de> <87wrt0e81n.fsf@telefonica.net> <62E9699C07054418AB66F9C5FCB54E5C@us.oracle.com> <87sk3oe3la.fsf@telefonica.net> <1154D96E7D2F401D849266F359E44BB9@us.oracle.com> <87ocecdzou.fsf@telefonica.net> <2256C17F740A425884AD551DE7758056@us.oracle.com> <87fwzodqqm.fsf@telefonica.net> <5138CDF30B2D4B778F948015614DA7BC@us.oracle.com> <87iq4ijtdy.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87mxtr8i6l.fsf@telefonica.net> Reply-To: ams@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1279821176 21245 80.91.229.12 (22 Jul 2010 17:52:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:52:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 22 19:52:53 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Obzwz-0007z1-05 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 19:52:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43931 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Obzwy-0006Tg-AF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:52:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46059 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Obzwo-0006Rd-AD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:52:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Obzwl-0007Se-SA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:52:42 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:42626) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Obzwl-0007SU-Hw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:52:39 -0400 Original-Received: from ams by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Obzwk-0003jT-FT; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:52:38 -0400 In-reply-to: <87mxtr8i6l.fsf@telefonica.net> (message from =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= on Fri, 16 Jul 2010 19:12:18 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:127647 Archived-At: > Can we please stop with the extravagant claim that new users are > not attracted to emacs because of some idiosyncratic bindings? That claim is extravagant indeed. The users are not attracted by the idiosyncratic keybindings, they are *repelled* by them. Again, simply not true, please stop. _Your_ experience might dictate things that are different frommine, but claiming that users are "repelled' is simply not true since new users use emacs. > One should strive for what is sensible and logical, not what is > currently modern and popular. The reason people are attached to > "the old way" is because it makes sense, and it has proven itself > over 30 years. If there is something in Emacs that is not sensible nor logical, that's the keybindings. Not only they are different from the current established ones, they often seem planned with the clear intention of causing RSI :-) They make sense in the context of emacs; they are menomics for functions. That is sensible and logical, none of your claims are strong since you disregard those facts.