[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Keybinding nit
From: |
Nick Roberts |
Subject: |
Re: Keybinding nit |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Oct 2006 10:19:02 +1300 |
> > 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).
Sorry, I misunderstood what C-x 4 0 does (I don't use it). Yes, C-x 5 k
for kill-buffer-and-frame seems a good idea.
--
Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob
- Re: Keybinding nit, (continued)
- 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