Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?

[T.V Raman]

chad <yandros@gmail.com> writes:


that's a good perspective, especially it comes with the test of time.
Also, for a tty-user, it's  interesting to think of the conditions under
which you would suspend emacs. I suspect it happens less and less,
since:
1. Linux TTY has multiple VCs,
   2. Linux TTY users who are using Emacs have the option of running
      with a terminal multiplexer like screen and friends,

      the above likely reduce how often you might hit C-z to suspend
      emacs so you can use your TTY for something else.

> FWIW, a few weeks back I proposed changing C-z away from suspend-frame
> for a similar goal, and got generally negative feedback about gui
> versus terminal differences. The proposal also involved C-S-z, which
> doesn't work in some terminal environments, so that probably skewed
> feedback somewhat.
>
> From experience, I've been rebinding C-z (to a keymap) for around 30
> years now, and stopped having any trouble with it around 27 years ago.
> (At the time, I would frequently use both hardware terminals,
> especially vt-100, vt-101, and vt-220's, and sometimes DOS or OS/9
> systems with serial modems.) 
>
> In practical terms, I suspect the conflict between "C-z is SIGSTOP"
> and "C-z is undo" is the biggest fault line between "typical personal
> computer users" and "unix-ish users", and thus is effectively a "third
> rail" of Emacs HCI discussions. That might just be pessimistic
> assumptions talking, though.
>
> ~Chad
>

-- 

Thanks,

--Raman
?7?4 Id: kg:/m/0285kf1  ?0?8