Re: A more modest proposal

[David Kastrup]

Miles Bader <address@hidden> writes:

> "Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden> writes:
>> Having the same keybinding behave completely differently depending if
>> you use a windowing system or the console is a bad idea.  What about
>> having C-z C-z do suspend-frame, and C-z z ... do undo?  Not that I
>> see a need for yet another undo keybinding.
>
> There's already a better binding for suspend-frame:  "C-x C-z"
>
> So I'd say, just change the meaning of C-z universally to undo, and let
> people use C-x C-z for suspend.

Arguably if Emacs is started from a tty where C-z is set to susp, the
user expectation might be that C-z suspends Emacs.

Arguably similar expectations would hold for C-s, C-v, C-q, C-u, so I am
not sure that this argument should prevail, even though C-z has a
slightly different quality, being slightly useful as a working panic
exit for the completely new user.

I don't agree with Alfred that minimization on a window system is
suitably similar to warrant the C-z keybinding as well on a window
system.

All in all, I don't think maintaining C-z in its current meaning is
worth the trouble, particularly on window systems.

-- 
David Kastrup