Re: Removing \M-s binding

Ah... my brain fart for replying off list so I'll correct that by taking this reply back on list.

On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:21:09 -0600,
Greg Bognar wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> On Wed 24 Jul 2019 at 19:22 Ken Gunderson wrote: 
> > Seems you've replied off list - perhaps so as not to embarass my ignorace?  In
> > any case, thanks for the enlightenment.  I've only been using Emacs and
> > Wanderlust for a decade or so now so still a "babe in the woods".
> 
> I'm on year 18, I think, so I hesitantly consider myself an intermediate user ;-)
> 
> > Be curious to know when that M-s global prefix bit slipped in cuz I don't read
> > the info pages regularly between major versions.  Might should get a clue bat
> > and at least keep up w/changes but even that is a flood of new knowledge so I
> > kind of learn as I go, as needed.
> 
> Maybe Emacs 23?  There should be a way to search old etc/news files for new
> features.
> 
> I find M-s very useful for assigning keys that do searches: M-s g to grep, M-s d
> to dictionary search, M-s m to multi-occur etc.
> 
> > This M-s o is handy dandy.  That said, I am not sure how major modes _should_
> > handle "breaking changes" such as this because should != must, at least
> > w.r.t. reading RFC's.  Seems like such places a huge burden on major mode
> > developers and users, especially as time goes by since addition of features to
> > future Emacs versions leaves a lot of keybindings "vulnerable".
> 
> There should be conventions for that.  For personal bindings, I remap C-z to be
> a prefix key (by creating a new keymap, "ctl-z-map"), and then I can assign my
> own additions to C-z.  That guarantees there are no conflicts with anything
> else.
> 
> > It also makes a lot more "sense" to me to have M-s bound to sticky summary
> > _when_ in summary buffer.  That's an easy mnemonic while +? is anything but
> > obvious and not amenable to mnemonic mental hooks.  At least not fer' us old
> > dogs trying to learn and remember new tricks.
> 
> The question mark was not supposed to be part of the addition.  I thought + by
> itself makes sense, since wl-summary-stick keeps the summary buffer around -- it
> will show up in your buffer list when you switch buffers, so you are /adding it/
> to the list of buffers.  Hence "+".  Isn't that easy to remember?
> 
> In your init file, you can
> 
> (add-hook 'wl-summary-mode-hook
>           (lambda ()
>             (local-unset-key "\M-s")
>             (define-key wl-summary-mode-map "+" 'wl-summary-stick)))
> 
> Just replace "+" with whatever you prefer, and you both have M-s commands and
> wl-summary-stick.
> 
> All the best,
> Greg

You bring up good points and provide good arguments in support of your
position.  I play devil's advocate a bit here ... cuz I wonder also
about "convenience", espeically w.r.t. to the dreaded "emacs pinky" so
tend to eschew extra pinky reaches.  OTOH, all those special chars use in
code are already a ton of reaches so what's one more, eh?

I don't use sticky summary much and when I did was something I
configured in .wl config.  M-s kind of escaped me.  So many emacs
keybindings... so few brain cells....  I think I might use it more now
that I've been enlightened though so then I start to think about
frequency of use.  Searching summary view I usually use Shift /, aka ?
to search by body, subject, etc., which is kind of limited in not
supporting regex's.  So I think M-s could be significantly more useful
and likely employed more often than us/sticking summary buffer.  Yet
for some reason I still not to fond of M-+ for a replacement.  Maybe
it's the need for yet another chord? 

In any case, thanks for your analysis on this.  Curious as to other wl
user views but am probably over analyzing it.  Heh...

Thanks again for the schoolin'.

Best-- Ken