Subject: RE: bug#2270: [PATCH] bug#2270, RE: 23.0.90; find-library:... (2) other-window version

From: "Drew Adams" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 12:38:51 -0700

> > I repeat my suggestion to add command `find-library-other-window'.
> 
> As mentioned in other threads, I'd rather we add a "use other 
> window for next command" prefix command (which we could bind
> to C-x 4), I could live with adding yet another such foo-other-window
> command since we don't yet have such a prefix command.

Yes, please add it while waiting for your ideal to bless the planet. ;-)

> > I also suggest that it be bound by default to `C-x 4 l'.
> 
> Since find-library is not bound to any key, I don't think
> find-library-other-window should be bound either.

"Since"?  The one doesn't follow from the other.  There is no logical reason why
we cannot have one command bound and not the other.  It depends on what we
expect the most common uses to be.  I proposed a key for the other-window
version because I don't think the same-window version is very useful.  But
that's me.

In any case, FWIW, I disagree that this should not be bound by default.

But if you are coming from the point of view that things must follow your
proposed new _implementation_, then such a hard-and-fast rule pretty much
follows, I'm guessing.  In spite of the fact that it might not be useful/needed
in all cases.  Hammer therefore nail?

> > I've used this command & key forever, and wouldn't be without it.
> > (And I rarely have a need anymore for same-window `find-library'.)
> 
> In my experience, people rarely need both the "same-window" and the
> "other-window" forms of a command, indeed.

Disagree, as one of the "people".  In this case, yes (this person rarely uses
the same-window version of this particular command).  But not in general.  I use
BOTH versions of most same- and other-window commands.

You keep repeating that supposition, BTW, but so far haven't provided any data
backing it up.  I, for one, would find it hard to believe that many people use
only `C-x C-f' or `C-x 4 f', but not both.

Perhaps this too is hammer therefore nail?  Does your proposed implementation
perhaps require a user to opt for one or the other for all uses?

Whatever.  I have the command/key for my own use.