From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: "whether the global keymap C-x 4 will be replaced by a command," Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:06:14 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83ft9woo68.fsf@gnu.org> <87wo377wxp.fsf_-_@mail.linkov.net> <83ft9um9op.fsf@gnu.org> <838sfmm54o.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="20799"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, juri@linkov.net To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 15 06:07:10 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 1jvYhJ-0005IR-Ef for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 06:07:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34620 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jvYhI-0002f1-D9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:07:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43208) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jvYgY-0002Cq-0R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:06:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:18115) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jvYgV-0004Dp-Nm; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:06:21 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A4D4344005B; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:06:17 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 24B2D440035; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:06:16 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1594785976; bh=4CgIqlxbo388WDLhdv95QxNfxNERwQXXd4GUuIOTZeo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=ErUpJkeYTXATMfi/KvjUq84t5E+xckL00Jg0S5il8vo9FZz5juvDvLhpYQ9unpSA1 B6FPk8tTmjIi5W0/Gzj0ANiRdh2LUVZ65UA4cefVjkPZ8cL4UF5HpP6jMFJuSmC3OE CNvE88+J6z+ZL+enmTG4kUjn7EyRobLFFFzlqcvsuUwUXhQ1ir2HSYXqXsK3VRue8K Bv8BecBjhFgRoRbwd8buoEPupksRzByWuwP2656As0DBeVGn3+32ouhToIjv1aAKAm LwS3mGpumGa/SoqcMMaP/b0xvbJLIH9bqhyAX98zSj1Jte1hol2E+8jQy9JPPkpC/U YZBB7LZVTwKMQ== Original-Received: from asado (unknown [45.72.129.42]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CEB48120784; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:06:15 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <838sfmm54o.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 14 Jul 2020 19:29:59 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/07/15 00:06:17 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=ham 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:252961 Archived-At: > The problem with C-u is actually my long-time lament. Making this > "spread" to more commands doesn't sound like progress to me. It also affects `C-x RET c`, which is another standard prefix command. I think we'll be better off making those prefix commands work well, than keeping them half-working and then having to avoid introducing more of them. > What advantages and exciting new features will this enable, that could > outweigh the downsides? Prefix commands give structure to the space of key-bindings. E.g. the new `C-x 4 4` prefix command makes almost all the special `foo-other-window` commands (and their key bindings) redundant. I think prefix commands are a powerful way to design the UI, making it overall simpler. I'm not sure if we want to go to something like Vi (where `forward-word` is split into a `forward` command and a `by-word` prefix command), but the principle of prefix command appears in several places, even though it's rarely implemented with as much care as `C-u` is. Stefan PS: The active region is another similar "structuring tool".