[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-j considered harmful (not really)
From: |
Deniz Dogan |
Subject: |
Re: C-j considered harmful (not really) |
Date: |
Mon, 16 Nov 2009 23:51:57 +0100 |
2009/11/16 Per Starbäck <address@hidden>:
> 2009/11/16 Per Starbäck <address@hidden>:
>> 2009/11/16 David De La Harpe Golden <address@hidden>:
>
>>> So, ^I for TAB, ^H for backspace, ^[ for escape etc.
>>
>> Sure, but I don't like that to be prerequisite knowledge for using Emacs.
>
> Which brings me to another point. There is at least one such
> correspondence that Emacs
> users are supposed to know about, that I think is unnecessary, and
> that is C-j = LF = \n.
> That is used for example in I-search and in arguments to query-replace etc.
>
> I would like some alternative way to enter newline in arguments,
> something having to
> do with <return> since that's the key actually associated with "new
> line" for all
> those you don't know their ASCII.
>
> That key should be used in I-search with the same meaning as C-j has
> now, and should
> be possible to use instead of C-q C-j to enter a newline in minibuffer
> input. Maybe
> <C-return> could be used for this?
>
> Then this would be an alternative just for people with window systems,
> but I think people
> who would benefit from this almost always have a window system anyway.
>
>
>
How about M-RET instead? That works in non-windowed Emacs as well and
seems to be unbound by default.
--
Deniz Dogan
- C-j considered harmful (not really), Per Starbäck, 2009/11/16
- Re: C-j considered harmful (not really),
Deniz Dogan <=
- Re: C-j considered harmful (not really), Juri Linkov, 2009/11/17
- Re: C-j considered harmful (not really), Per Starbäck, 2009/11/22
- Re: C-j considered harmful (not really), Deniz Dogan, 2009/11/22
- Re: C-j considered harmful (not really), Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/22
- Re: C-j considered harmful (not really), Juri Linkov, 2009/11/23
- Re: C-j considered harmful (not really), Per Starbäck, 2009/11/23
- RE: C-j considered harmful (not really), Drew Adams, 2009/11/23
- RE: C-j considered harmful (not really), Drew Adams, 2009/11/23