Re: Re: Poll: Who is using these commands

[Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com>]

Leo <sdl.web@gmail.com> 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.
> 

I disagree: they are not parenthesis movement bindings - they are
structure-navigation bindings. For example, C-M-f is forward-sexp.
In lisp, an sexp has some relationship to parentheses, but it is
incidental; in other programming modes, an sexp is whatever makes
sense in that language and these commands are redefined appropriately.

I think it is entirely appropriate to use these bindings to navigate
structure in org-mode as well.

My 2 cents,
Nick