GNU bug report logs - #37485
27.0.50; C-m in describe-bindings

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: 37485 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#37485: 27.0.50; C-m in describe-bindings
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 20:23:45 +0300

> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
> Cc: 37485 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 19:07:44 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> I'm not sure I understand...
> >
> > I meant that users usually press RET, not C-m.
> 
> You've done a poll?  :-)

I don't need one.  Most users don't know C-m and RET are the same.

> >> Both RET and C-m are keys we press, but the intended (both mnemonic and
> >> ergonomic) key stroke here is `C-c C-m c' (etc) and not the awkward `C-c
> >> RET c'.
> >
> > Call me awkward, then.
> 
> But do you use RET instead of `C-m' in these keystrokes because that's
> what `describe-bindings' say or because you prefer to hit `RET'?

What's the difference?  Both, I guess.

> Anyway, I've grepped through the *.texi files, and there are 152 matches
> for `C-c C-m ...' and 8 for `C-c RET'.  And all of those 8 are for RET
> as the final character in the keystroke.
> 
> If you expand to "C-. C-m"/"C-. RET" it's 170/20.  (All those additional
> ones are from mule.texi.)
> 
> It seems the mode writers' intentions are pretty clear: They mean for
> the users to type C-c C-m ..., but `describe-bindings' tells them to type
> C-c RET.

I don't see why this should be decided by majority vote.

Anyway, what's the real problem here?  Just the fact that you
personally are annoyed?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.