Re: Proposal: add a binding for `imenu' under M-g

[Filipp Gunbin]

On 20/04/2022 09:38 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> From: Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>
>> Cc: yandros@gmail.com, fgunbin@fastmail.fm, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 22:15:47 -0700
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> On Fri 15 Apr 2022 at 09:50am +03, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> 
>> >> From: Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>
>> >> Cc: fgunbin@fastmail.fm, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> >> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 23:45:29 -0700
>> >>
>> >> Another one I thought of today was 'M-s i' because there is some
>> >> similarity with 'M-s o' and 'M-s M-w'.  How does that seem?
>> >
>> > Sounds better to me, thanks.
>> 
>> Would you mind saying how strongly you think M-s i is better than M-g i?
>> 
>> I ask because while I myself have become neutral between the two,
>> everyone else who has spoken up seems to prefer M-g i.  So I was hoping
>> you might say more.  Thanks.
>
> I don't know in what units to measure that and how, sorry.  It's just
> an intuitive feeling of having my proverbial brow raise when I saw the
> suggestion, that's all.  I think it's up to you to decide how much it
> weighs.
>
> The others didn't explain their motivation, either.

Though I feel like your intuition may prove more correct than my
motivated opinion, here's one:

M-s feels good as mnemonic for search/show, and indeed, we have "M-s o"
(occur - searches and shows), "M-s h" (highlight - also searches and
shows) and maybe others.  Yes you can go to occur results, but that's
another action.

While M-g would mean "go".  And stuff like "M-g g", "M-g c", they
request input only to go somewhere.  imenu falls in this category -
request input (select from completions) and go there.

Filipp