[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3
From: |
Nix |
Subject: |
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3 |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:20:09 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) |
On 26 Oct 2011, martin rudalics told this:
>> Sorry, but may I ask what is the problem with the traditional names of
>> these commands?
>
> Confusion of operation and state based reasoning. People adopting the
> latter were surprised that a horizontal split would produce a vertical
> divider (among them ISTR Glenn Morris, Miles Bader and some people on
> help-gnu-emacs).
Quite. This is the second-most-confusing thing in Emacs: it still
confuses me when I encounter it now, seventeen years after I met it for
the first time. (The most confusing thing in Emacs is the inverted
naming of scroll-{up,down}-command with respect to the modern meanings
of 'scroll up/down', but that is probably not changeable without
breaking the world at this late date.)
--
NULL && (void)
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, (continued)
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, David De La Harpe Golden, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Juri Linkov, 2011/10/27
- RE: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Drew Adams, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Lennart Borgman, 2011/10/26
- RE: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Drew Adams, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, David De La Harpe Golden, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Dave Abrahams, 2011/10/26
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/10/26
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Ulrich Mueller, 2011/10/26
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, martin rudalics, 2011/10/26