On May 9, 2010, at 4:26 PM, Leo wrote:
On 2010-05-09 12:43 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
what do you think about C-M-f, C-M-b, C-M-n, C-M-p as alternative
bindings? These seem to make *a lot* of sense, because, as many here
have pointed out, they are so much better repeatable (Keep C-M- down,
press the character.)
It is terrible idea to override these parenthesis movement bindings.
They are universal in all editing modes that if overridden people who
also use other emacs packages will be surprised. For example to move
from a open parenthesis to a closing parenthesis.
Isn't this a legitimate case for overwriting these? The outline
structure is a hierarchical structure which can be traversed in a
similar way as the parenthesis structure in Lisp code.... Emacs major
mode conventions allow overwriting general commands when this makes
sense for the mode and executed similiar functionality.
I am no exper here, so please tell me if this would be a reasonable
interpretation or not.
- Carsten
However, it makes sense to bind C-M-a and C-M-e to move the the
beginning/end of a subtree.
I don't use these org movement bindings much because isearch does the
job perfectly and it can be used everywhere.
Leo
--
CCL-USER> _
_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
- Carsten
_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
