[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#24902: Antw: [EXT] Re: bug#24902: 25.1; C-x = for Unicode
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
bug#24902: Antw: [EXT] Re: bug#24902: 25.1; C-x = for Unicode |
Date: |
Tue, 01 Feb 2022 00:06:55 -0500 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
If "splitting" C-x = means what I think it means, it implies using two
key sequences instead of one. That would be a significant cost.
Would this change offer any practical benefit?
> <Shrug> They are different commands with evidently different goals, so
> making them new commands sounds appropriate to me.
That is an improvement in conceptual neatness, but I don't think it is worth
the practical price of two keys where one key now serves.
> The intent is to have something that's useful for a larger portion of
> the users on `C-x ='?
That could be an improvement, depending. What, concretely, would that
command do?
--
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- bug#24902: Antw: [EXT] Re: bug#24902: 25.1; C-x = for Unicode,
Richard Stallman <=