> Opinionated, or just old and consistent?
That old hotkeys didn't survive the evolution so it doesn't make sense to support them anymore.
That old hotkeys didn't survive the evolution so it doesn't make sense to support them anymore.
No. It makes sense to support them if the userbase is familiar with them. Nothing is more annoying than having changes like that forced on you.
Then there's the fact that the "GUI standards" conflict with other command-line standards in a pretty serious way. Every command shell on Windows I've ever used uses a different convention than the "GUI standard" for copy-paste for exactly that reason (e.g. Windows Command Prompt's "mark" stuff, PuTTY's select/middle-click behavior).
I think that every user who can use terminal, knows combinations like Ctrl + S (Save) or Ctrl + C (Copy). So they are familiar to them as well and should cause no problems.
For me, for example, those combinations from vi, nano or emacs are simply weird and non-standard. And I assume that they are "non-standard" for everyone who was born after 1980 and have never seen a PDP or something from that era.
Therefore it doen't make sense to support those key combinations only because 40 years ago they were used in PDP and other archaic systems.
OK, you write the memo about replacing Ctrl-C for SIGINT.
Every single Linux user who edits text on a cli amd hasn't bothered to learn vim.
No, the point of nano was to be like pico.