[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?
From: |
Nick Dokos |
Subject: |
Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions? |
Date: |
Wed, 29 Jan 2014 08:16:39 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
Florian Beck <address@hidden> writes:
> On 28.01.2014 10:08, Bastien wrote:
>
>> I think most of these keybindings could migrate to a C-c C- version.
>
> There is no need for migrating them IMO.
>
> The recommendation is:
>
> Sequences consisting of `C-c' followed by any other punctuation
> character are allocated for minor modes. Using them in a major
> mode is not absolutely prohibited, but if you do that, the major
> mode binding may be shadowed from time to time by minor modes.
>
> This means important commands should have a binding reserved for major
> modes. But there is absolutely no need to remove bindings which (for
> many org users) have worked just fine for a long time.
But it's not just a matter of satisfying rules: it's a matter of making
it easy on users. Having a "bad" binding as well as a "good" binding for
something would mean that if I load a minor mode that takes over the
"bad" binding, I would then lose it in the major mode and have to
remember the "good" binding. That's more confusing IMO than having a
single "good" binding: if we need to retrain fingers, we need to retrain
them once, not every time we load a minor mode that steps on some
binding.
I find myself more in agreement with Seb than with Bastien here. The
argument that reducing the number of "bad" bindings reduces the chance
of conflicts does not hold water IMO: we will always have to be looking
in the rear-view mirror for some minor mode that will step on us. If
it's an important enough problem to solve, we should just follow the
emacs guidelines in their entirety.
--
Nick
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, (continued)
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Sebastien Vauban, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Bastien, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Sebastien Vauban, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Bastien, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Sebastien Vauban, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Thomas S. Dye, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Bastien, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Thomas S. Dye, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Iannis Zannos, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Florian Beck, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?,
Nick Dokos <=
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Bastien, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Achim Gratz, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Andreas Leha, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Iannis Zannos, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Florian Beck, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Bastien, 2014/01/29
- Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Nicolas Goaziou, 2014/01/29
Re: [O] org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?, Alan Schmitt, 2014/01/23