From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Tweaking t-m-m to make room for d-s-m Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 23:32:51 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87sk7pzqsp.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <87mxxw6c7b.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <20100326092833.19294vuz9efv5qg4@webmail.mnet-online.de> <33DBCF2DFF71401DB0861E66EC29ED2B@us.oracle.com> <5F1D87251C98412EADC1187ABFCC3E8D@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269642917 22987 80.91.229.12 (26 Mar 2010 22:35:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 22:35:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mathias@mnet-mail.de, David Kastrup , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 26 23:35:12 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 1NvI7O-00051Z-Ao for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 23:35:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52153 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NvI7N-0001yb-HP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:35:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NvI5d-00005c-LZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:33:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55718 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NvI5c-0008Uq-0Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:33:17 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvI5a-0001IJ-6O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:33:15 -0400 Original-Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]:41194) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvI5Y-0001I4-VW; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:33:14 -0400 Original-Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id d23so263753fga.12 for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:33:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:received:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=c74JJOFberuylrvhdi7y3nlUSWUGapXiw+hGocgyDBE=; b=Mu7Vss48HaUhxOULMyD5mlC+YbpXnpye5CmSQWqfAvfpk4oEnFkTY0nbBRjrRKrqDq Q6N87w+KTb0DNpKee69luMygxQ7deMjHJDClaHLxcPoobWbmQluUm5pFo+Ghs8jiBahS f6CC0+NSeTE0vbQivODg65AOrsMG6gKy5ox68= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=Jy9KJ7fHXNOMzTG7UGK32V9Qob3BLQKoN0I4h2GaMoG//sOBSj5Ol9xwVFZU3LJzua EEP6X7dAqng2xHR8LFPA6wVazVS2BPtx2gWV47kktCXRlUCeIIcLZ9cqTG0ZNykZ8YzS Mwj5iQTHcVLrU+RIrE8vZlRl6IcddvDdI9qr4= Original-Received: by 10.239.141.72 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:32:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Original-Received: by 10.239.174.15 with SMTP id h15mr152534hbf.46.1269642791158; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:33:11 -0700 (PDT) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:122735 Archived-At: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Drew Adams wrote: > >> It is new users that should be treated with respect. All of them know >> these CUA key bindings. All of them use them. (If they are not computer >> illiterates.) > > But please do not think you > have a monopoly on respect for new users. I am glad I do not have that ;-) I just wanted to make the real subject a bit more visible. > But I'm not convinced that the only rationale for the current Emacs bindings is > the sorry weight of legacy. If it were not for the CUA keys the Emacs bindings were a good choice. (But I really do recommend sticky keys for those that use them.) It is not hard at all to understand the choices. But if CUA keys had been used before Emacs then I guess Emacs key bindings would have included them and looked quite a bit different. I am still all for adding "skins" for this type of change. > Why? Isn't it just as troublesome that C-z means `resume-frame'? resume-frame hardly needs such an important (easy to type) key binding. undo is far more common. > I, for one, am not convinced that CUA or Viper is the best way to promote Emacs > productivity. CUA *and* Viper ;-)