|
From: | Gregory Heytings |
Subject: | RE: [External] : Re: Concern about new binding. |
Date: | Fri, 05 Feb 2021 23:38:27 +0000 |
... but apparently you prefer to continue to use the few remaining keys that are not bound by default? Isn't that contradictory?How so? The few remaining keys are more than a single key.... and a complete keymap is more than a single key.No, sorry; I still don't understand. You can bind a keymap to a key. If there are _several_ keys that you can bind keymaps to, then that offers more possibilities than if there is only _one_ key that you can bind a keymap to.
I'm not sure I see what you mean. It's not _one_ key. Having a complete keymap at the disposal of third-party libraries means that there are (at least) 26 letters free; each of them can be bound to a separate keymap. Magit would bind the "g" and "M-g" keys, some other library would bind the "." and "," keys, another one would bind "x" key to a keymap, another one would bind the "C-k" and "C-l" keys, you would bind the "p" key to a keymap for your bookmark+ library, and so forth. Or am I missing something?
And with the "strong" version of the proposal, there would be (at least) 52 other prefix keys, with the meta- and control-meta- prefixes.
And the currently unbound keys are not limited to `C-x LETTER' or even `C-x <whatever>' keys.
Almost all C-SYMBOL and almost all C-M-SYMBOL keys are currently unbound indeed, but I don't see any evidence that Emacs is about to grab them all.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |