Re: New keybinding suggestion: C-x _ for `shrink-window'

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Bastien wrote:
> My suggestion would be to have both: C-x _ as a new keybinding for
> `shrink-window' (since we already have a key for `enlarge-window')
> *and* bw-interactive.el, which sounds nice.  

It would be a bit strange, see below.

> IMHO it's better to stick to the possibility of balancing/resizing
> windows (or shrinking/enlarging them) with just *one* keystroke.

bw-interactive lets you do this quite easily, with just "C-x + +" (today 
it is on "C-x +").

> A few comments on bw-interactive.el though.  Assume I start with a full
> window and have C-x + bound to `bw-start-resize-mode':
>
> - It seems that the first arrow keystroke says: "Hello, please start
>   resizing with arrow keys!" but wait for another keystroke. I think
>   the user might expect that the first arrow keystroke has a visible
>   effect on window resizing already.

I do not believe so, but starting the resizing and telling the user what 
is going on is a bit complicated. I tried to mimic the way this is done 
some OS window handlers. When you start resizing you get into a state 
where the window handler first needs to know which border to move. The 
mouse pointer is then moved to that border.

It is the same with bw-interactive, which also changes the color of the 
relevant windows mode line. The window handler however also changes the 
mouse pointer to reflect the state. Currently this is not possible in 
Emacs, but if bw-interactive is adopted I would suggest to add relevant 
mouse cursors for showing the state.

> - C-x 2 C-x + <up> won't shrink the window if it's larger than the
>   buffer;  but C-x 2 C-x + <down> <up> <up> will shrink the window
>   even if it's *initially* larger than buffer.  I believe that the 
>   first set of keystrokes should already shrink the window, or at 
>   least send an error to the user.

This is a slight misunderstanding, see above.

Maybe adding a message of some kind when exiting the minor mode for 
resizing would make thins more clear?

> Anyway, bw-interactive seems like it's already very useful to me, 
> thanks for that.

Thanks.