[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove
From: |
Daniel Colascione |
Subject: |
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Jul 2024 12:47:35 -0400 |
User-agent: |
K-9 Mail for Android |
On July 2, 2024 12:32:07 PM EDT, Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net> wrote:
>>>> +@kindex C-x 4 DOWN
>>>
>>>I can't believe someone might want to use such long key sequences
>>>for one of the most frequent actions. It's even longer than
>>>'C-x o' it's supposed to improve.
>>
>> It's an improvement on C-x o for some use cases because it's more
>> predictable, not because it's shorter. Besides, the key sequence
>> isn't even that hard to type. Have you tried it?
>
>Press and hold the Control key, press the x key on the bottom row,
>release the Control key, press the 4 key on the top row, press
>an arrow key on the keypad. OTOH, with a modifier: press and
>hold the modifier key, press an arrow, release the modifier key.
Counting keystrokes gives a misleading picture of key binding complexity. Try
it yourself: C-x 4 LEFT. The left hand invokes the familiar C-x, then glides up
to hit 4 with no further coordination. The right hand hits an arrow key as
another familiar action. C-x 4 LEFT might seem long, but I find it a lot more
fluid than things like M-j in practice.
>
>>> I think there are no better keys
>>>for switching windows than arrows with a modifier.
>>
>> I use these and they're fine. The problem with binding a modifier
>> with bare arrow keys is that all sorts of customizations and modes
>> bind these already. C-x 4 is vacant, logical, and short enough.
>
>So you personally use a modifier, and propose a long key sequence
>that nobody will use?
No. I use the keys I've proposed.
>
>>>Since all keybindings in the 'C-x 4' keymap are for commands
>>>that display a buffer in another window, 'C-x 4 LEFT/...'
>>>could do the same to display the buffer of the next command
>>>in the specified window.
>>
>> Such a command doesn't exist and doesn't sound particularly useful to me.
>
>It's 'windmove-display-default-keybindings'. It's less frequently used
>than 'windmove-default-keybindings', so a longer key sequence
>like 'C-x 4 DOWN' would be fine for 'windmove-display-in-direction'.
That seems like a lot of extra steps for something conceptually simple.
>
>> Putting window management under C-x 4 makes logical sense.
>
>We already have a new keymap for window management under C-x w.
>Whereas C-x 4 is for buffer display. Therefore it makes more sense
>to put 'windmove-display-default-keybindings' under C-x 4.
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Juri Linkov, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Daniel Colascione, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Juri Linkov, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove,
Daniel Colascione <=
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Dmitry Gutov, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Yuri Khan, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Dmitry Gutov, 2024/07/02
RE: [External] : Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Drew Adams, 2024/07/02
RE: [External] : Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Drew Adams, 2024/07/02
Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove, Yuri Khan, 2024/07/03