RE: "whether the global keymap C-x 4 will be replaced by a command,"

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> > C-x 4 C-f is an important command -- don't break it!
> 
> Its effect should remain the same (displaying the output buffer in
> another window), but the command namespace will be cleaner by removing
> duplicated commands with '-other-window' and '-other-frame' suffixes.

I _want_ separate commands.  They're wonderful.  Beautiful, handy, first-class citizens.

I want to be able to bind a same-window, other-window, or other-frame command to a simple key in this or that mode, depending on what the command does.  For some actions in the same mode I want the same-window command, for other actions I want the other-window command.  For some actions I might not want there to exist a (predefined) other-frame or other-window or same-window command.  Some actions make good sense only for one or two such manifestations.

You apparently see only a (neglible, IMO) upside to the changes being proposed/made.  I see also downsides.

The minor downside of defining multiple commands (same, other-win, other-frame) for the same basic action, and of thus having multiple such in the namespace, doesn't bother me at all.

And in fact, the presence of multiple such in the namespace is a plus in my eyes, not a minus.  A plus interactively and programmatically.

As usual, my somewhat defeatist, rearguard plea is to please, at a bare minimum, give users an easy way to 100% return to the situation ante, i.e., to undo such an "improvement", globally & comprehensively, as well as just for individual instances.

The goal should keep users foremost in mind.  It shouldn't be to simplify the implementation or the code maintenance, or to see how clever we can make the implementation.  It should be all about the users.

> Also it should allow the users to add the effect of displaying the
> command output buffer in another window to more commands easily, by just adding
> a key binding to the existing non-window command in the 'C-x 4' keymap.

As I said earlier: seems like a solution looking for a problem to solve.  I haven't heard of any real problem that will be solved.  Is there one?  What's the disease this cure is for?

> Anyway, before changing the 'C-x 4' keymap we could try this approach
> only on project-specific submap 'C-x 4 p' to see how well it works.

Please don't change `ctl-x-4-map' or any of the others.  If you must fiddle, please fiddle in a new, tiny sandbox off in a corner somewhere.