Message from discussion do you want a emacs cookbook?
From: Elena <egarr...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: do you want a emacs cookbook?
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 08:20:47 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1289233247 17221 127.0.0.1 (8 Nov 2010 16:20:47 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 16:20:47 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: q18g2000vbm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=126.96.36.199; posting-account=AFCLjAoAAABJAOf_HjgEEEi3ty-lG5m2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:188.8.131.52)
On Nov 8, 3:40=A0pm, m...@distorted.org.uk (Mark Wooding) wrote:
> (The `CUA' undo/cut/copy/paste bindings no longer make any sense with a
> Dvorak keyboard. =A0What happens to those bindings on, say, French Azerty
> and German Qwertz keyboards?)
I do not use CUA anyway, since I use Viper + Vimpulse. Thus I'm not
aware of Emacs' key-sequences for commands which have a corresponding
for Vi-like mapping, either. I was arguing over CUA in principle,
since I think that every applications should conform to it, Emacs
included, even when Emacs pre-dates it and even if there are trade-
offs to be made to avoid hurting old-timers, existing packages,
documentation. It is rather unfortunate that CUA bindings are two
among the most important in Emacs, but still...
> There's usually some underlying logic to the mode-specific bindings.
Agreed, however, there is no reason to prefer a packages' bindings to
another one's. For instance, in my configuration C-c C-c compiles
current function in both SLIME and Emacs Lisp modes, and if I were to
use some other interactive REPL, I'd rebind the command right away to
corresponding "compile current function" command. No reason to have
two different keychords.
> > - I try to learn from old-timers' experience instead of scavenging for
> > Emacs Lisp scraps...
> That's fine. =A0Piecing together small bits of Lisp oneself is a useful
> skill, though. =A0Indeed, exposing users to Lisp, however antiquated, is
> one of Emacs's great contributions.
Agreed. I just wished it would easier not to miss the forest for the
trees. I would love watching some master "Emacser" at work. I'm sure
there is a lot to learn which I don't feel has been poured into the
many tutorials and posts which many old-timers have been kind enough
to contribute to Emacs' community.
> > Reality is much simpler: remap commands which start with either C-c or
> > C-x to something else when they work on region.
> That's a never-ending job, though -- and it makes all of the (external)
> documentation wrong. =A0Emacs itself is clever enough to print the right
> key bindings in its help, but the manual will still be wrong.
If you were seeking perfection, that would be correct. I was
suggesting a trade-off instead, like a warning to users which enable
alternative keybindings that then they would have to make a mental
translation to follow shared documentation, just like they have to
understand and/or "remap" the meanings of "buffer", "window", "frame",
"kill", "yank", ecc. I think Emacs and "modern" novices should meet
in the middle.