[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Keybinding nit
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Keybinding nit |
Date: |
Thu, 19 Oct 2006 22:46:52 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Nick Roberts <address@hidden> writes:
> > > C-x 4 0 and C-x 5 0 are not at all symmetric, and C-x 4 0 is not
> > > really intuitive.
> > >
> > > Maybe one should rather have C-x 4 k and C-x 5 k for killing both
> > > buffer and window/frame?
> > >
> > > Since C-x k reads a buffer name, I would expect C-x 4 k to
> > > read a buffer name also.
> >
> > Well, I wouldn't (there are quite a few keybindings where "k" just
> > kills something). And since neither C-x 0 nor C-x 5 0 kills a buffer,
> > I would not expect C-x 4 0 to do it, either.
> >
> > It all boils down to what feels more natural and expected. Of course
> > that is a matter of personal taste, and I like to think my taste is
> > not too far out here. Other opinions?
>
> If you mean move C-x 4 0 to C-x 5 k, I agree. (I'm not sure what you want
> C-x 4 k to do).
Serves me right. If it weren't for disagreement, I'd have no
agreement at all. I'd have proposed to move C-x 4 0
(`kill-buffer-and-window') to C-x 4 k and have C-x 5 k be mapped to
`kill-buffer-and-frame' (which does not yet exist).
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
- Re: Keybinding nit, (continued)
- Re: Keybinding nit, Peter Lee, 2006/10/18
- Re: Keybinding nit, Miles Bader, 2006/10/18
- Re: Keybinding nit, Kevin Rodgers, 2006/10/19
- Re: Keybinding nit, Miles Bader, 2006/10/22
- Re: Keybinding nit, Kevin Rodgers, 2006/10/24
- Re: Keybinding nit, Miles Bader, 2006/10/24
- Re: Keybinding nit, Kevin Rodgers, 2006/10/25
Re: Keybinding nit, Richard Stallman, 2006/10/19
Re: Keybinding nit, Jan D., 2006/10/20
Re: Keybinding nit, David Kastrup, 2006/10/20
RE: Keybinding nit, Drew Adams, 2006/10/20