[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Tab bar tabs landed on master

From: Ergus
Subject: Re: Tab bar tabs landed on master
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 19:49:53 +0200
User-agent: NeoMutt/20180716

On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 08:18:59PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
From: Juri Linkov <address@hidden>
Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2019 22:53:40 +0300

> I agree, but if "C-x 6" is already used, it's taken.  Is it such a
> catastrophe to use "C-x 7"?

"C-x 7" is an illogical key, it breaks the sequence of C-x 4, C-x 5.

Then how about the suggestion to use "C-x t" instead?

We need to ask the users of 2C how often they use C-x 6.
I believe they are using a more mnemonic key f2.

Asking them and receiving the answers could take ages.  I don't think
we have that time.  We need to decide soon, because once the emacs-27
branch is cut, it will be harder to make such changes.

Would more people please speak up on this issue, and suggest
alternative prefixes if they have ideas about that?


(Advertisement: personal opinion here)

Call me revolutionary, but I am perfectly fine to set this to `C-x 6`
and move the old one to a better place (when needed) Specially if this
keeps things more organized and `standardized` somehow (easier to

2C already have something much more "privileged": f2 is short,
exclusive and mnemonic... Very few commands has the privilege to get a
single key binding as 2C already do. Free bindings does not grow like
mushrooms in emacs... ;p

C-x t is "fine", but if breaks the sequence 4 5 6 (which is not a
disaster, but will break the "standard" we have been following up to
now.) In order of priority I will base the decisions:

1- ergonomic
2- mnemonic
2.5- economy of shorter bindings
3- backward compatibility (terminal compatibility/limitations are exception)
4- historical reasons.

So actually I prefer C-x 6 for this feature that potentially may be very
popular for new users as all the browsers and modern applications use

C-x t on the other hand is popular for "term" and similar commands
(better-shell multi-term and so on...) so in the future we should
consider maybe to set it to something related to that if possible.

As the comment in two-column.el explains, a choice of C-x 6 for 2C-command
was just a historic accident.

That might be so, but I don't think we can correct that accident
without some transition period.  Which is not possible ion this case.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]