Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

[Bastien]

Hi all,

C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to cycle
through archived subtrees.

In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which needs
to work globally.

So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported here:
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325

I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any objection?

Thanks,

-- 
 Bastien

Re: Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

[stardiviner]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256


Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to cycle
> through archived subtrees.
>
> In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which needs
> to work globally.
>
> So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported here:
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325
>
> I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any objection?
>
> Thanks,

I object this change. Emacs tab-bar is not enabled by default. When conflict,
user can customize keybinding. I don't think it's very necessary to change.

- -- 
[ stardiviner ]
       I try to make every word tell the meaning that I want to express.

       Blog: https://stardiviner.github.io/
       IRC(freenode): stardiviner, Matrix: stardiviner
       GPG: F09F650D7D674819892591401B5DF1C95AE89AC3
      
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQFIBAEBCAAyFiEE8J9lDX1nSBmJJZFAG13xyVromsMFAl7KVPcUHG51bWJjaGls
ZEBnbWFpbC5jb20ACgkQG13xyVromsNH7gf+NdaEwp1Up/jxbebM65JcBky/Cu6I
9rFQvFOzQ/dIQDb6IpMzOqJta8AwPIXL5tXebs4Af16D8kO5fL+q/noUoxBE7IUA
CQiGlAW3HAeIPFomnkLwSubctfbORJhwmVPoKoNkVoH98eTwuAXQVORzwDpaU7/2
NasQO6KJ1VJ48v8ipXamVO/KcDIYl4zRv5inXcpsigIpXMQ1tkeNAZUB6thaH1xz
3lDy5nSBozfrDZXq8maYV+Oa5cklR6OuNN+0VHk7HBci5vlKHAuMygLXL7M2ftIZ
HkOs56aSlKwql7BzNUnkJuGx5KQVizG6cQy9ide9rjWwf5iZPn6mR8jIbg==
=JWH3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

[Joost Kremers]

On Sun, May 24 2020, stardiviner wrote:
> Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:
>> C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to 
>> cycle
>> through archived subtrees.
>>
>> In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which 
>> needs
>> to work globally.
>>
>> So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported 
>> here:
>> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325
>>
>> I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any 
>> objection?
>>
>> Thanks,
>
> I object this change. Emacs tab-bar is not enabled by default. 
> When conflict,
> user can customize keybinding. I don't think it's very necessary 
> to change.

I would support the change, since both Org mode and tab-bar-mode 
are part of core Emacs and I doubt it'll be clear to new users 
coming to Emacs why these conflicting key bindings exist. Instead, 
they'll be annoyed that they cannot C-TAB out of the Org buffer 
and their impression of Emacs (not just Org mode or tab-bar-mode) 
will suffer. Ever more so because it's probably not immediately 
obvious to new users how C-TAB is different from just TAB: they 
both open the subtree at point.

I've been using C-TAB for a long time to switch buffers (albeit 
not with tab-bar-mode), and it's always annoying when some mode 
usurps (from my perspective) this keybinding. Now, I'm familiar 
with Emacs and the relative independence and freedom that 
individual packages have, plus C-TAB is a personal keybinding, so 
I know this sort of thing may happen and I know how to resolve it. 
For a new user, that won't be so obvious. For them, this will 
simply look like a badly designed UI.

So I think the general argument for habit-breaking UI changes 
applies: it creates a more consistent UI, which means it's easier 
on new users and more in line with what they expect. For existing 
users that want the old behaviour back, it's a simple 
configuration in their init.el.

-- 
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments

Re: Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

[Vladimir Nikishkin]

I'd rather support this change, as I don't have TAB on my keyboard, I
use C-i instead of TAB

OTOH, C-M-i , which is essentially M-TAB, and essentially what the
changes is supposed to be, if flyspell-auto-correct-word (found in
flyspell-mode-map)

So, if this change is made, and flyspell is turned on by default (an
not turning it on is an offence punishable by Grammar Nazi), this
binding will be shadowed.

All this is a mess.

-- 
Yours sincerely, Vladimir Nikishkin

Bind `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-c C-TAB instead of C-TAB

[Bastien]

Hi all,

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to cycle
> through archived subtrees.
>
> In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which needs
> to work globally.
>
> So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported here:
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325
>
> I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any objection?

I've finally used C-c C-TAB for `org-force-cycle-archived'.

It seems easy to remember for those used to C-TAB and it does not
other Emacs or system keybindings AFAIK.

The change will be released in Org 9.4.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

[Bastien]

Hi all,

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to cycle
> through archived subtrees.
>
> In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which needs
> to work globally.
>
> So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported here:
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325
>
> I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any objection?

I've finally used C-c C-TAB for `org-force-cycle-archived'.

It seems easy to remember for those used to C-TAB and it does not
conflict with other Emacs or OS keybindings AFAIK.

The change will be released in Org 9.4.

-- 
 Bastien