Re: Emacs key bindings through the ages

[rustom]

On Nov 16, 2:33 am, bramble <cadet.bram...@gmail.com> wrote:

> By the way, are there any Emacs key bindings that the community in general 
> doesn't like (aside from Xah ;) ),
> but that the powers that be adamantly refuse to change? An odd one (odd to 
> me, anyway) is using C-x r m ...

When I first read about emacs in Interactive Programming Environments
25 years, ago this question would have seemed like an oxymoron --
after all the whole point was that you should have your bindings and I
mine and a thousand Xahs should flourish.  Unfortunately it seems that
extensibility in theory and in practice are different things...

For example consider:
1.  There are a hundred or so(?) color themes and Ive spent some time
trying to select one that is not so bright for my tired eyes but
whatever Ive tried, invariably some face or other in some mode or
other becomes invisible.

2. There are several hundred fonts available in principle but the
proportional ones that are easier on the eyes cant maintain
indentation

3. Likewise keybindings. After Lennart pointed towards 'sticky keys' I
immediately tried them out but I found it too intrusive -- it keeps
popping up some dialog at me. Of course more fine-tuning may be
possible -- having shift as a 'chord' but alt and control as 'sticky'
but I dont know how to do it.

So to answer your question: are there keybindings I dont like: Well I
dont like to have to 'chord' -- it hurts.
I wish I could have keybindings like vi --  single key-commands for
the hand, powerful modes in the head -- the look like eclipse --
multiple proportional fonts -- on top of emacs' extensibility.