From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Recentish C-s M-y change Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 07:57:58 +0300 Message-ID: References: <87r1na4tyu.fsf@gnus.org> <87tus6tj7s.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87a6txigm1.fsf@gnus.org> <874kk5lzew.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17996"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.0 (3d08634) (2020-11-07) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 30 06:00:02 2020 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 1kuTab-0004ao-VR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:00:01 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33522 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kuTaa-00008y-VD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 00:00:00 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41498) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kuTZk-000890-LQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:59:08 -0500 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]:49441) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kuTZi-0007V0-SJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:59:08 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:41.210.145.189]) (AUTH: PLAIN securesender, TLS: TLS1.2,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 0000000000295440.000000005FEC08F8.00007375; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 21:58:32 -0700 Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.170.207.13; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=stw1.rcdrun.com X-Spam_score_int: -17 X-Spam_score: -1.8 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, GAPPY_SUBJECT=0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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:262100 Archived-At: * Drew Adams [2020-12-29 20:26]: > Personally, I use `C-s C-y' as a prefix key for > several different yank commands. So that's another > reason I'm not in favor of moving the longstanding > `C-s M-y' behavior to `C-s C-y'. My experience: When people spoke about C-s M-y I was wondering because I was thinking I use that and I never had a problem, but then I see I was using C-s C-y without even thinking. C-y is yank so C-s C-y is logical. M-y is yank-pop usually used after C-y, so C-s M-y is logical extension to same basic feature. I would not expenct C-s M-y to do something different than what M-y does without C-s