Re: Suggestion: Mapping of M-g should be goto-line

[Danilo Segan]

Today at 7:11, Jari Aalto wrote:

>         If put side by side, "set face default" and goto-line, I would
>         estimate that the 99 % of the cases, there is more need for
>         goto-line. Therefore it would be better if the M-g was mapped
>         to it. 

Emacs tries hard to make goto-line unnecessary, AFAICT.  Can you
provide an example of when goto-line couldn't be replaced with a
better functionality (such as using M-x next-error)? 

>         Users need line information. After all, Emacs for most, is
>         programming language development environment: C / C++, Python,
>         Perl, Ruby etc. In time they may find and start use other
>         features like Gnus, Mail and others.

Exactly, and that's why the next-error and friends are so useful — I
need not worry about typing the exact line number, because I do not
care about the exact line number.  I care about the place with
certain code/error/whatever, and that's where I want to go.  Emacs
has the context available, so better make use of it.

FWIW, C-x ` is bound to next-error, and it's a big win in situations
like this.

>         The "de facto" situation for long has been that everybody maps
>         M-g to goto-line. People advice that in newsgroups, because it
>         is indeed the most logical key.
>
>         If we would take a poll in Emacs newsgroups, presumably the
>         "yes" votes for goto-line would win in great majority.

Perhaps, but that doesn't mean that it's a right thing to do.  
I seldom use current M-g binding as well, but not less than M-x
goto-line. 

Cheers,
Danilo