Re: removal of ^T from WhereIs and GotoLine

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

---1155178722-574121715-1783347694=:3436
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1; FORMAT=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-ID: <[email protected]>


Hi Benno,


>> And yes, ^W^T is what I use to go to a line when I know its number.
>> What's wrong with this?
>
> It was illogical in my eyes.

Well, I'm looking for something (^W) and it happens to be a line 
number (^T). It doesn't sound that illogical to me.

Somewhat like when we discussed dropping ^W^Y / ^W^V.

It's also a key combination I use many times each day to close a browser's 
tab (= I've finished what I was doing with it) and open a clean new one.

But maybe I should weigh a bit more heavily.

You maintain Nano and you make, by far, most of the commits, so most of 
the work. I am grateful for this. But Nano is not "Benno's editor", where 
people would simply follow your aesthetic feelings or choose another tool. 
It is the default editor in Linux distributions. Last week, the AI 
embedded in Google's home page gave me some sysadmin instructions which 
included editing a file with Nano. Millions of users are relying on you, 
Benno. You have a responsibility towards them.

Breaking the user interface is a serious issue, as I know you know. I 
guess very, very few of the long-time users read nano-devel though. They 
expect Nano to work as it always has, only better, with new features 
perhaps. Many will curse "whoever did that", but not necessarily take the 
time to contact you and engage in polite discussion. And it will take 
quite a few years before the latest Nano becomes the default in all Linux 
distros.

Evolution is quite normal and desirable. But changing the user interface 
requires, I think, rock-solid reasons.

As an aside, last week's AI told me to use ^O^X, not ^S^Q. There will be 
confusion on newbies' side when an advice given by experienced users or AI 
does not work as advertised.

So maybe I'm just clinging to old habits, but maybe there is a real 
underlying issue here and potentially lots of trouble ahead. I'll let you 
be the judge of that.


Sébastien.




> The good news is that there is no real harm in the removal, because 
> nowadays users can easily make the toggles themselves:
>
>    bind ^T "{cancel}{gotoline}" search
>    bind ^T "{cancel}{whereis}" gotoline
>
> This is documented in the relevant commit, but nowhere else.
> Maybe I should put it in the FAQ?
>
>
> Benno
>
>
---1155178722-574121715-1783347694=:3436--