Re: "C-x 5 5" vs "C-x 4 1" inconsistency

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Kévin Le Gouguec <kevin.legouguec@gmail.com>
> Cc: juri@linkov.net,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:48:25 +0200
> 
> > How about "C-x 4 x" and "C-x 5 x". where "x" stands for "eXecute"?
> > An alternative could be "C-x 4 RET" and "C-x 5 RET".
> >
> > Would any of these be acceptable?
> 
> I don't mind x or RET in terms of mnemonics, but my clumsy fingers find
> them less ergonomic than C-x K K.

That's a peculiar argument.  There's only one "C-x K K" combination
for any K, and yet we have more than a dozen commands starting with
"C-x 4" and similarly for "C-x 5".  Does it mean that all but one of
them is not ergonomic?