Some healthy discussion here, so let me preface this by saying I appreciate all of you working to keep the default bindings useful and not excessive. That said, I still feel there should be a single binding for (yank-pop -1). Here's why: First, all of the other commands that traverse something (that I can think of) have an opposite bound to an equally convenient combination. C-n/C-p and C-f/C-b, C-v/M-v, C-s/C-r are some examples off the top of my head. Of course 'M-- M-y' works, but that's like saying 'M-- C-n' does the same thing as C-p. (As a side note, I'll admit I didn't actually know/remember M-- is a shorthand for 'C-u -1'. That does make the common case of overshooting the item you want by 1 a lot less painful.) Second, I fully agree with Clément that just because a command is trivial, it's automatically unhelpful to bind it. Again, see C-n/C-p. And lastly, if a user has a custom binding for M-Y or C-M-y (I'm not dead set on either), that will still prevail. I don't see why they'd be any more reluctant to override those than M-y, which you said lots of people do. It's pretty hard to google "M-y", much less "M-Y", without Google deciding I'm actually looking for "my", so I'm going to trust you on that. So that's my 2 Cents. If you're still unconvinced, feel free to close this :) On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Drew Adams wrote: > > > Users can always override any key bindings, of course. > > > But many users are hesitant to override default bindings, > > > for whatever reasons. > ... > > > Yes, and my `M-y' is only turned on in Icicle minor mode (but > > > which I am always in). You can drop that example, if you like, > > > and just google for `emacs "M-y"' if you would like to see what > > > other users do with `M-y'. > > > > I'm having trouble reconciling these two statements: on the one hand > > people don't like overriding existing bindings, but on the other hand > > many people override the existing M-y binding? > > Maybe you're having trouble because you're trying too hard to > argue. ;-) > > Many users do override default bindings. And many do not. > > In any case, the proposal was about `M-Y', which is not bound > by default. > > > > My point was the _general_ one that I stated: (1) Many users > > > have their own uses of `M-y' and `C-M-y'. And (2) adding this > > > particular binding is not helpful - it is trivial for anyone > > > to add it, if they really want it. > > > > I don't understand. All bindings are trivial to add. That doesn't make > any > > of them less helpful. > > It's a trivial command, which is not hard for a user to discover > or consider binding. And as you yourself pointed out, `M-- M-y' > does the same thing. > > You're trying too hard to pick a fight, I'm afraid. > > Do _you_ think `M-Y' should be bound by default to the suggested > command? If so, please present some supporting arguments. >