GNU bug report logs - #37447
26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 37447 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 37447 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
To: Bug GNU Emacs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:45:57 +0200

Just a few thoughts about deleting and killing commands.

We have:
+ "Delete"
  - <deletechar> [<delete>] (delete-forward-char)
  - <C-delete> (kill-word)
  - M-DEL [<M-delete>] (backward-kill-word)

? Perhaps C-<delete> should do (backward-kill-word) and <M-delete>
  should (kill-word).  Then <M-delete> would be like 'M-d', which
  seems to be correct way.

+ "Backspace"
  - DEL [<backspace>] (delete-backward-char)
  - <C-backspace> (backward-kill-word)
  - M-DEL [M-<backspace>] (backward-kill-word)

? <C-backspace> as another (backward-kill-word) on the same button is
  useless(?), maybe change it to (backward-kill-sentence), because
  it's less typing than 'C-x DEL'?  And then (perhaps) assign 'C-x
  DEL' to new function "backward kill line" (kill-line with 0
  argument?).  OR let 'C-x DEL' backward kill sentence, and assign
  backward kill line to 'C-DEL'.

? Also perhaps rebind 'C-S-backspace' to 'C-M-backspace' for
  (kill-whole-line)?


S. U.

GNU Emacs 26.3 (build 1, x86_64-w64-mingw32) of 2019-08-29

Message #8 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:39:27 +0300

> From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:45:57 +0200
> 
> We have:
> + "Delete"
>    - <deletechar> [<delete>] (delete-forward-char)
>    - <C-delete> (kill-word)
>    - M-DEL [<M-delete>] (backward-kill-word)
> 
> ? Perhaps C-<delete> should do (backward-kill-word) and <M-delete>
>    should (kill-word).  Then <M-delete> would be like 'M-d', which
>    seems to be correct way.
> 
> + "Backspace"
>    - DEL [<backspace>] (delete-backward-char)
>    - <C-backspace> (backward-kill-word)
>    - M-DEL [M-<backspace>] (backward-kill-word)
> 
> ? <C-backspace> as another (backward-kill-word) on the same button is
>    useless(?), maybe change it to (backward-kill-sentence), because
>    it's less typing than 'C-x DEL'?  And then (perhaps) assign 'C-x
>    DEL' to new function "backward kill line" (kill-line with 0
>    argument?).  OR let 'C-x DEL' backward kill sentence, and assign
>    backward kill line to 'C-DEL'.
> 
> ? Also perhaps rebind 'C-S-backspace' to 'C-M-backspace' for
>    (kill-whole-line)?

These key bindings are too old to change them in the default
configuration.  You can, of course, change them in your personal
configuration.

Thanks.

Message #11 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:18:13 +0200

> These key bindings are too old to change them in the default
> configuration.

So inconsistency with 'M-d' and 'M-<delete>' will stay and
'C-<backspace>' & 'M-<backspace>' doing the same thing will also stay
because of history?  I could ignore 'C-S-<backspace>', but previous
two cases should be "updated".

But if "No." means "No." - close the bug, please.  Unless we are
waiting for more opinions.

Message #14 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
To: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 23:31:21 +0300

>> These key bindings are too old to change them in the default
>> configuration.
>
> So inconsistency with 'M-d' and 'M-<delete>' will stay and
> 'C-<backspace>' & 'M-<backspace>' doing the same thing will also stay
> because of history?  I could ignore 'C-S-<backspace>', but previous
> two cases should be "updated".
>
> But if "No." means "No." - close the bug, please.  Unless we are
> waiting for more opinions.

Imagine many users using the same keys for years, and now
they will start doing the opposite - a recipe for disaster.
But if a safer solution is possible, then I'd recommend
binding one of C- or M- prefixes to sexp killing commands
because their default prefix C-M- can't be used: C-M-DEL
runs system shutdown, and C-M-<backspace> kills the X server.
There is a replacement C-M-k for kill-sexp, but no key
for backward-kill-sexp.

Message #17 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>, Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 14:17:29 -0700 (PDT)

> But if a safer solution is possible, then I'd recommend
> binding one of C- or M- prefixes to sexp killing commands
> because their default prefix C-M- can't be used: C-M-DEL
> runs system shutdown, and C-M-<backspace> kills the X server.
> There is a replacement C-M-k for kill-sexp, but no key
> for backward-kill-sexp.

Please don't use just `C-' or just `M-' for sexp
commands.  Please use the conventional `C-M-'.

FWIW, `C-M-k' for `kill-sexp', and `C-M-<backspace>
for `backward-kill-sexp', work on at least some
platforms, such as MS Windows. 

And for uses of Meta that are problematic for some
platforms, users can always use ESC.  E.g. `ESC C-k'
instead of `C-M-k' or `ESC C-<delete>' for
`C-M-<delete>'.  Admittedly not as handy, but usable
(and users with that problem can always rebind them).

(BTW, did you mean `C-M-<delete>' instead of `C-M-DEL'?
The latter doesn't seem to be bound by default.)

Message #20 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> gmail.com>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>, 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:59:29 -0400

Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:

>> But if a safer solution is possible, then I'd recommend
>> binding one of C- or M- prefixes to sexp killing commands
>> because their default prefix C-M- can't be used: C-M-DEL
>> runs system shutdown, and C-M-<backspace> kills the X server.

> FWIW, `C-M-k' for `kill-sexp', and `C-M-<backspace>
> for `backward-kill-sexp', work on at least some
> platforms, such as MS Windows. 

FWIW, recent (since around 2007~2010 from what I see on the web) Xorg
disables C-M-<backspace> as the kill X server by default.

Message #23 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>, 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 01:13:32 +0300

>>> But if a safer solution is possible, then I'd recommend
>>> binding one of C- or M- prefixes to sexp killing commands
>>> because their default prefix C-M- can't be used: C-M-DEL
>>> runs system shutdown, and C-M-<backspace> kills the X server.
>
>> FWIW, `C-M-k' for `kill-sexp', and `C-M-<backspace>
>> for `backward-kill-sexp', work on at least some
>> platforms, such as MS Windows.

Currently I use `M-- C-M-k' as a replacement of `backward-kill-sexp'.

> FWIW, recent (since around 2007~2010 from what I see on the web) Xorg
> disables C-M-<backspace> as the kill X server by default.

I can't confirm since I'm afraid of typing these keys :)

Message #26 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
To: juri <at> linkov.net
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 10:17:38 +0200

> Imagine many users using the same keys for years, and now
> they will start doing the opposite - a recipe for disaster.

And that's why I'm not proposing changing C-b/n/p/f to C-h/j/k/l.  But
these two cases (without C-S-<backspace>) I pointed out doesn't seem
very critical, moreover they look like a bug (with 'M-<delete>'
deleting backward instead of forward as 'M-d' does - 'C-d' does
similar thing do <delete>, so 'M-...' should also be similar) or like
a leftover from the past ('C-<backspace>') that could be reused for
something useful.

Also, there are "obsolete" functions that are removed after few
versions of Emacs, so why not do the same thing to key bindings?  They
don't change that often, so it won't be a revolution, right?  Keeping
old key bindings forever(?), especially when user can change them, is
rather strange - confusion among new users, less keys for new/other
commands, etc.  I think Emacs should have one default key per command,
older should be marked as "obsolete" and removed after 1 or 2 major
versions.

But, this is from perspective of a beginner, so...

Message #29 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, juri <at> linkov.net
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 11:36:24 +0300

> From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 10:17:38 +0200
> Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> Also, there are "obsolete" functions that are removed after few
> versions of Emacs, so why not do the same thing to key bindings?

Because they are not "obsolete" by any measure.  They are highly
popular key bindings that I, FWIW, am using every day.

And btw, I can never understand these arguments about changing what
Emacs does by default.  You can easily rebind the keys yourself, so
why force your personal preferences on everyone else?

> Keeping old key bindings forever(?), especially when user can change
> them, is rather strange

It's not strange, it's called stability.

Message #32 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
To: eliz <at> gnu.org
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 11:17:29 +0200

> (...) They are highly popular key bindings that I, FWIW, am using
> every day.

Even 'M-<delete>' that does something opposite to 'M-d', when <delete>
and 'C-d' do the same thing?  Doesn't that bother you?  For me it's
inconsistency, but maybe there is a reason for this...

> And btw, I can never understand these arguments about changing what
> Emacs does by default.  You can easily rebind the keys yourself, so
> why force your personal preferences on everyone else?

If I would want to change 'C-a' to 'C-b' (or 'C-S-<backspace>' as
I tried, but not any more) then you are right, but not in this case.

The above example is not a change just because I like it (I don't even
use it), but rather spotting inconsistency and pointing it out.

As for 'C-<backspace>' also "no", because I was trying to reuse
something that is already there ('M-<backspace>').  But fine, someone
may use 'C-...', so I could leave it alone as well.

Message #35 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 12:31:43 +0300

> From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
> Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 11:17:29 +0200
> 
> Even 'M-<delete>' that does something opposite to 'M-d', when <delete>
> and 'C-d' do the same thing?  Doesn't that bother you?

What does "C-h c M-<delete>" display?  Does that text answer your
questions, when you contrast it with what "C-h c" shows for <delete>
and C-<delete>?

Message #38 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
To: eliz <at> gnu.org
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 12:32:19 +0200

> What does "C-h c M-<delete>" display?  Does that text answer your
> questions, when you contrast it with what "C-h c" shows for <delete>
> and C-<delete>?

C-h c M-<delete>:
    M-DEL (translated from <M-delete>) runs the command
    backward-kill-word

C-h c <delete>:
    <deletechar> (translated from <delete>) runs the command
    delete-forward-char

C-h c C-<delete>:
    <C-delete> runs the command kill-word

I'm not sure how this could help me or how I'm suppose to understand
this.

M-<delete> doesn't run command, but is translated to 'M-DEL' that does
run the command.  M-<backspace> uses the same translation.  Couldn't
it be:
- <M-delete> runs the command kill-word
- M-DEL (translated from <C-delete>) runs the command
  backward-kill-word

Or couldn't 'C-<delete>' run command backward-kill-word directly?

Message #41 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:46:10 +0300

> Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 12:32:19 +0200
> 
>  > What does "C-h c M-<delete>" display?  Does that text answer your
>  > questions, when you contrast it with what "C-h c" shows for <delete>
>  > and C-<delete>?
> 
> C-h c M-<delete>:
>      M-DEL (translated from <M-delete>) runs the command
>      backward-kill-word
> 
> C-h c <delete>:
>      <deletechar> (translated from <delete>) runs the command
>      delete-forward-char
> 
> C-h c C-<delete>:
>      <C-delete> runs the command kill-word
> 
> I'm not sure how this could help me or how I'm suppose to understand
> this.

The DEL part should be your hint.  DEL is a key that deletes
_backward_.

> M-<delete> doesn't run command, but is translated to 'M-DEL' that does
> run the command.  M-<backspace> uses the same translation.  Couldn't
> it be:
> - <M-delete> runs the command kill-word
> - M-DEL (translated from <C-delete>) runs the command
>    backward-kill-word

See above.

Message #44 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 18:22:32 +0200

> The DEL part should be your hint.  DEL is a key that deletes
> _backward_.

Ok, now I'm confused even more...  I know DEL deletes backward, but in
the manual it is related to <backspace> key.  Now, I'm writing about
"Delete" key (button) that is below "Insert" and next to "End", not
about "Backspace" key.

So, to write it as simple as possible, on keyboard 'C-d' deletes char
forward, so does 'Delete' button.  'M-d' kills word forward, so I'm
expecting 'M-Delete' will do the same, but instead it kills backward
because it's translated to 'M-DEL'...

Message #47 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>, Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Sebastian Urban <mrsebastianurban <at> gmail.com>, 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 18:41:36 +0300

On 20.09.2019 1:13, Juri Linkov wrote:

>> FWIW, recent (since around 2007~2010 from what I see on the web) Xorg
>> disables C-M-<backspace> as the kill X server by default.
> 
> I can't confirm since I'm afraid of typing these keys :)

I can confirm, and I tried and failed to use this combination to kill 
Xorg a couple of years ago. Just once :)

Message #52 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Devon Sean McCullough <Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net>, 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:30:36 +0100

Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net> writes:

> Seems to be on purpose, bindings.el:1236:
>
> ;;; These are dangerous in various situations,
> ;;; so let's not encourage anyone to use them.
> ;;;(define-key global-map [C-M-delete] 'backward-kill-sexp)
> ;;;(define-key global-map [C-M-backspace] 'backward-kill-sexp)

I've now reinstated the bindings, since X stopped killing itself if you
hit those keys decades ago (in all mainstream configurations).

The merged bug report discussed moving some of other related keys
around, and the conclusions was that we don't want to do that, so I'm
closing this bug report.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Message #57 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, Noam Postavsky
 <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Devon Sean McCullough <Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net>,
 "37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 "29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: RE: [External] : bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:35:21 +0000

> > ;;; These are dangerous in various situations,
> > ;;; so let's not encourage anyone to use them.
> > ;;;(define-key global-map [C-M-delete] 'backward-kill-sexp)
> > ;;;(define-key global-map [C-M-backspace] 'backward-kill-sexp)
> 
> I've now reinstated the bindings, since X stopped killing itself if you
> hit those keys decades ago (in all mainstream configurations).

[C-M-delete] is problematic for MS Windows, no?

Message #60 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net,
 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: bug#29430: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete> and <backspace>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 16:56:01 +0200

> Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
> Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
> Resent-Sender: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:35:21 +0000
> Accept-Language: en-US
> Cc: Devon Sean McCullough <Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net>,
>  "37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
>  "29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
> 
> > > ;;; These are dangerous in various situations,
> > > ;;; so let's not encourage anyone to use them.
> > > ;;;(define-key global-map [C-M-delete] 'backward-kill-sexp)
> > > ;;;(define-key global-map [C-M-backspace] 'backward-kill-sexp)
> > 
> > I've now reinstated the bindings, since X stopped killing itself if you
> > hit those keys decades ago (in all mainstream configurations).
> 
> [C-M-delete] is problematic for MS Windows, no?

Problematic in what sense?

Message #63 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: "larsi <at> gnus.org" <larsi <at> gnus.org>,
 "29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 "Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net" <Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net>,
 "37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 "npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net" <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [External] : Re: bug#29430: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete>
 and <backspace>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 20:49:16 +0000

> > [C-M-delete] is problematic for MS Windows, no?
> 
> Problematic in what sense?

By default, at least, it's grabbed by Windows.

I suppose you can use `w32-register-hot-key'
to wrestle it away from Windows.  But that's
a pretty important key for Windows, IME.

Not an expert.  Background (which I'm sure you,
at least, are familiar with):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control-Alt-Delete

(I use `C-M-backspace' for `backward-kill-sexp'.
I use `Ctrl+Alt+Delete' for Windows.)

Message #66 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net,
 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: bug#29430: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete>
 and <backspace>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 08:44:27 +0200

> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> CC: "larsi <at> gnus.org" <larsi <at> gnus.org>,
>         "npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net"
> 	<npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>,
>         "Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net"
> 	<Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net>,
>         "37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
>         "29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 20:49:16 +0000
> 
> > > [C-M-delete] is problematic for MS Windows, no?
> > 
> > Problematic in what sense?
> 
> By default, at least, it's grabbed by Windows.

But that hasn't changed just because Emacs now has a binding to that
key, has it?  IOW, whatever problems Windows users had or didn't have
before the change, they still either have or don't have.

Message #69 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: "larsi <at> gnus.org" <larsi <at> gnus.org>,
 "29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 "Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net" <Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net>,
 "37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 "npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net" <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [External] : Re: bug#29430: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete>
 and <backspace>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 15:16:32 +0000

> > > > [C-M-delete] is problematic for MS Windows, no?
> > >
> > > Problematic in what sense?
> >
> > By default, at least, it's grabbed by Windows.
> 
> But that hasn't changed just because Emacs now has a binding to that
> key, has it?  IOW, whatever problems Windows users had or didn't have
> before the change, they still either have or don't have.

Yes, of course.  But without binding it by default
users are less likely to suffer the gotcha.

Just mentioning that that binding can be a problem
for some Windows users.  If you feel it's important
to bind it by default, so be it.

Message #72 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net,
 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: bug#29430: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete>
 and <backspace>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 17:27:30 +0200

> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> CC: "larsi <at> gnus.org" <larsi <at> gnus.org>,
>         "npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net"
> 	<npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>,
>         "Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net"
> 	<Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net>,
>         "37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
>         "29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 15:16:32 +0000
> Accept-Language: en-US
> 
> > > > > [C-M-delete] is problematic for MS Windows, no?
> > > >
> > > > Problematic in what sense?
> > >
> > > By default, at least, it's grabbed by Windows.
> > 
> > But that hasn't changed just because Emacs now has a binding to that
> > key, has it?  IOW, whatever problems Windows users had or didn't have
> > before the change, they still either have or don't have.
> 
> Yes, of course.  But without binding it by default
> users are less likely to suffer the gotcha.

How so?  The probability of users using the key is independent of
whether Emacs does or doesn't define a key binding for it.  Besides,
who are those Windows users that don't know about Ctrl-Alt-Del
sequence, and are likely to use it without understanding what they
will get?

Message #75 received at 37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: "larsi <at> gnus.org" <larsi <at> gnus.org>,
 "29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <29430 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 "Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net" <Emacs-Hacker2017 <at> jovi.net>,
 "37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <37447 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 "npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net" <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [External] : Re: bug#29430: bug#37447: 26.3; Commands on <delete>
 and <backspace>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 15:51:05 +0000

> > > > > > [C-M-delete] is problematic for MS Windows, no?
> > > > >
> > > > > Problematic in what sense?
> > > >
> > > > By default, at least, it's grabbed by Windows.
> > >
> > > But that hasn't changed just because Emacs now has a binding to
> > > that key, has it?  IOW, whatever problems Windows users had or didn't
> > > have before the change, they still either have or don't have.
> >
> > Yes, of course.  But without binding it by default
> > users are less likely to suffer the gotcha.
> 
> How so?  The probability of users using the key is independent of
> whether Emacs does or doesn't define a key binding for it.  Besides,
> who are those Windows users that don't know about Ctrl-Alt-Del
> sequence, and are likely to use it without understanding what they
> will get?

Can we agree to disagree, or must we also disagree
about such agreement?

Emacs advertising this as a default binding might
just incite some Emacs users to try to use it, in
Emacs.  That's all.  Not a big deal.  Certainly
they'll find out soon enough...

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.