[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#24379: [PATCH] lisp/bindings.el: Bind (yank-pop -1) to M-Y
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
bug#24379: [PATCH] lisp/bindings.el: Bind (yank-pop -1) to M-Y |
Date: |
Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:58:44 -0700 (PDT) |
> > Users can always override any key bindings, of course.
> > But many users are hesitant to override default bindings,
> > for whatever reasons.
...
> > Yes, and my `M-y' is only turned on in Icicle minor mode (but
> > which I am always in). You can drop that example, if you like,
> > and just google for `emacs "M-y"' if you would like to see what
> > other users do with `M-y'.
>
> I'm having trouble reconciling these two statements: on the one hand
> people don't like overriding existing bindings, but on the other hand
> many people override the existing M-y binding?
Maybe you're having trouble because you're trying too hard to
argue. ;-)
Many users do override default bindings. And many do not.
In any case, the proposal was about `M-Y', which is not bound
by default.
> > My point was the _general_ one that I stated: (1) Many users
> > have their own uses of `M-y' and `C-M-y'. And (2) adding this
> > particular binding is not helpful - it is trivial for anyone
> > to add it, if they really want it.
>
> I don't understand. All bindings are trivial to add. That doesn't make any
> of them less helpful.
It's a trivial command, which is not hard for a user to discover
or consider binding. And as you yourself pointed out, `M-- M-y'
does the same thing.
You're trying too hard to pick a fight, I'm afraid.
Do _you_ think `M-Y' should be bound by default to the suggested
command? If so, please present some supporting arguments.
bug#24379: [PATCH] lisp/bindings.el: Bind (yank-pop -1) to M-Y, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2016/09/06