|
From: | Gregory Heytings |
Subject: | Re: Concern about new binding. |
Date: | Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:56:33 +0000 |
I guess there is nothing to make a final decision about unless someone threatens with a patch. Please do that more. :-)Could we revert the previous one then?? That's the first part of my question.I'd prefer to find a binding to which people could agree, because that would leave fewer people unhappy. The two candidates proposed till now are "C-x G" and "C-x M-u".
You forgot the proposal to which the mail you are replying to explicitly refers. So I'll copy it here again: it is to make "C-x g" a keymap for buffer-related operations, with in particular "C-x g r" bound to revert-buffer:
C-x g c = clone-buffer C-x g d = diff-buffers C-x g f = fit-frame-to-buffer C-x g h = hexl-mode C-x g i = insert-buffer C-x g l = font-lock-mode C-x g n = rename-buffer C-x g r = revert-buffer C-x g R = revert-buffer-with-fine-grain C-x g t = toggle-truncate-lines ...BTW, Richard replied to the "C-x G" proposal: "Letters following C-x are not case-sensitive. That is a systematic rule. That rule is not sacred; for a good enough reason, we could break it. But this is not an important reason; it is not sufficient reason to break a rule."
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |