emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[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




reply via email to

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