bug#41890: bug#42210: bug#41890: 28.0.50; [PATCH]: Add bindings for project.el

[Sean Whitton]

Hello,

On Mon 20 Jul 2020 at 02:46AM +03, Dmitry Gutov wrote:

> On 18.07.2020 19:06, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Okay, here's a prototype.  I had to rebase Philip's patch so I thought I
>> might as well attach my version of that too.
>
> The code LGTM, but I still wonder whether we do need the prompt in this
> case. The downsides are that we'll need to keep the list up-to-date, and
> at some point (maybe) it will grow too big to fit in the prompt. Will we
> need a variable project-other-place-use-entire-map too?

If all one has in mind is C-x 4, then it doesn't seem like this is a big
danger -- many commands display in the other window by default, such as
project-find-regexp, and it reasonable to guess that a good proportion
of new commands which get added will also be like this.

However, if you have C-x 5 and C-x t in mind as well, then it starts to
seem like we'll want project-other-place-use-entire-map.

How about having a project-other-window-commands defcustom for C-x 4 p,
and using the entirety of project-prefix-map for C-x 5 p and C-x t t?
C-x 4 p can prompt as per my patch, and C-x 5 p and C-x t t could just
put a static message in the minibuffer like other-frame-prefix and
other-tab-prefix do at present.

>> I have been wanting the new C-x 4 p bindings all week as C-x p f with
>> fido-mode has replaced a lot of my use of C-x C-f, so I hope I can
>> replace my use of C-x 4 f with C-x 4 p f soon:)
>
> I'm happy to hear that.

I intended to say a bit more: C-x p f has replaced a lot of my use of
C-x b too.  It is very nice not to have to guess whether something is
already visited and just complete across all the project's files.  I use
C-x 4 b a lot so I'm looking forward to C-x 4 p f.

-- 
Sean Whitton