Ilisp key binding changes - Please Review

   From: "Clementson, Bill" <[email protected]>
   Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 14:52:08 -0600

   Ok, I have completed a first pass over doing a complete overhaul of the
   ilisp fsf key bindings. I have created a web page covering the proposed
   changes in more detail . . .

   Please review these proposed key bindings and either reply to the group
   or to me via email. 

   Thanks,
   --
   Bill Clementson

My comments are appended; please do with them as you see fit.  You've
done a great job; this will be a big step forward for ilisp.  (Though
perhaps not as big a step if you should decide to pass on all of my
suggestions.  But that's just my viewpoint.  ;-)

   From: "Clementson, Bill" <[email protected]>
   Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 14:41:55 -0600

   > My only comment is: great, thank you very much.

   Thanks - it was a bit more effort than what I had initially planned
   on doing . . .

Funny how that is . . .

					-- Bob Rogers
					   http://rgrjr.dyndns.org/

------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Comments on http://home.attbi.com/~bc19191/ilisp-keybindings.htm
bindings:

   Even though binding indent-line-ilisp to TAB shadows
comint-dynamic-complete, I think that indentation is more useful than
completion in ilisp-mode.  Besides, filename completion often fails in
ilisp-mode, because emacs loses track of the process CWD.

   Using "C-c {" for raw-keys-ilisp may be more mnemonic, as it suggests
that you are entering a new mode.  (Pity that binding "C-c }" for
interactive-keys-ilisp would be pointless.)

   I was somewhat surprised to learn that compile-defun-lisp is "C-c
C-c" in ilisp-mode under the current FSF-leaning scheme; how do people
manage to interrupt their Lisps in this case?  But since "C-c C-c" is
compliant and even easier to type than the classic "C-c c" for this
common lisp-mode command, maybe it would be simpler to avoid binding it
in ilisp-mode, where it is not very useful?

   comint-mode binds "C-c C-w" to backward-kill-word as part of its TTY
driver emulation, but it hardly seems worth moving compile-region-lisp
in order to preserve this.  backward-kill-word is also bound as M-DEL,
so you're not losing anything.  At the very least, consider preserving
the lisp-mode binding, and omitting this in ilisp-mode.

   I don't think it's really necessary to find keybindings for every
last ilisp command, though I do admire your zeal in carrying the process
forward to its logical conclusion.  For example, fast-lisp, slow-lisp,
and status-lisp are easy to type as M-x commands, or to mouse via the
command menus, so there's no real urgency to find them new keybindings.
Also, it could be argued that reset-ilisp is somewhat risky, and
shouldn't be bound to any key.  These "nonbindings" might free up more
mnemonic bindings for other uses.  Specifically, if slow-lisp is left
unbound, then "C-c C-L" can be used for ild-locals, which allows "C-c
C-D" to be used for documentation-lisp.

   I am a little concerned that many bindings require C-S- and M-S-
combinations for the second character.  These seem more likely to make
peoples' hands hurt than three-character sequences where each character
requires at most one modifier, with preference given to sequences that
tend to use the same modifier combinations.  But maybe I'm alone on
this; I know I've mentioned this before, and nobody piped up to agree.
And I confess this is somewhat academic for me; I now use a Kinesis
keyboard with a footpedal for most of my typing, so emacs is a breeze.
Control-Meta-Shift-Whatever.

   It is probably too late to suggest that the bindings implemented by
ilisp-lispm-bindings be adopted with a "C-c" prefix, as a consistent
source of new bindings for compile-defun-lisp, eval-defun-lisp,
arglist-lisp, and documentation-lisp.  That would conflict with four of
your proposed ild bindings, so is probably not feasible unless you also
choose to adopt my previous suggestion for the ild commands.


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf