emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Key bindings proposal


From: Mathias Dahl
Subject: Re: Key bindings proposal
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 09:16:40 +0200

> function has to be on a key or people won't use it.  And the key
> combinations keep getting weirder and weirder.  Like M-s a C-s to do
> an isearch!

I just use C-s. In my Emacs the binding you mention does not exist, so it is
probably a quite new invention. And my guess is that it is there for
completeness, someone
decided (I did not even know about M-s until now and I have used Emacs
since 1997) to
keep all search related stuff on M-s and for completeness isearch was
placed there too.
I assume the idea is to type M-s to get into "search mode" and from
there type a few keys
to execute the particular search command you want. I agree that the
extra "a C-s" lacks a
good "flow". Why not just "a s" (what does the "a" stand for?). But,
again, isearch has its own
top level binding, so most will use that.

> It would be a good idea for us to question ourselves why we are so
> obsessed with key bindings whereas the rest of the world gets by
> perfectly fine with very few key bindings.

I have asked myself the same thing. I think in many other programs
users use the menus
(using the mouse) and/or the toolbar and other widgets. Around me, at
work, very few people
use the keybindings  that do exists in those other programs. They
limit themselves to cut,
paste, copy, save and new, at tops.

> - In most modern OS's, one can navigate menus with keys.  Emacs
> doesn't use this mode of usage at all.

I see very few navigating the menus by keys although I find this to be
an excellent replacement when
a command does not have its own keybinding. After some tries I learn
the path to the command I want
so that it in practice gets a keybinding (like M-f s, or whatever).

> ... and the menus look totally disorganized.

Oh come on. There might be some items that are not where you would
expect but to say
that the menus look totally disorganized is unfair. Why not suggest a
new structure in a new thread?

> In principle, this can give us much more "real estate"
> to work with, without having to memorize arcane key bindings that make
> our fingers twist.

M-x is right there, no one forces you to use arcane bindings (I agree
that some are, for example
those starting with C-@, which is very hard to type on a Swedish
keyboard layout) and you can use F10
to reach the menus, or M-x tmm to navigate the menus as text. Or use
the mouse (Gaaaah! :)

> - We have totally ignored the potential of command names.

Oh, have "we"? I use M-x all the time and have learned how to use
partial completion to more quickly
execute commands with long names.

>  I can type
> `M-x isearch' a lot faster than I can type `M-s a C-s'

Again, its there for completeness (my guess anyway). Use C-s instead
if this is something you do a lot.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]