[IshKebab]

> ctrl-shift-h

Ah yes, the logical shortcut for "find" (enormous face palm).

Why do so many open source devs find sane UX so hard? It's a bit weird.

(And yes I know it isn't exactly the same as "find" - it that is your instinctive response then you're misunderstanding how UX works.)

[aumerle]

That shortcut opens HISTORY, hence it is ctrl+shift+H. And if the terminal emulator used up ctrl+f to implement find, it would mean that no terminal program could use ctrl+f to implement find. Maybe next time before you try to imply other people dont know UX, pause, and consider if you know what you are talking about. Incidentally, using the term UX itself, generally is a good signal that the person that is using it doesnt have a clue what they are talking about.

[IshKebab]

> And if the terminal emulator used up ctrl+f to implement find, it would mean that no terminal program could use ctrl+f to implement find.

Gnome Terminal sensible uses Ctrl+Shift+F to get around this. Kitty... does not.

> Incidentally, using the term UX itself, generally is a good signal that the person that is using it doesnt have a clue what they are talking about.

Of course you think that.

[aumerle]

And ctrl+shift+f is the same as ctrl+f for you? The point of using "identical" keybindings is to ease discoverability across programs. ctrl+shift+f and ctrl+f are not identical and therefore there is no point to doing that.

And pretty much anyone that has to deal with internet commenters using the term UX thinks that, not just me.

[IshKebab]

Ctrl+Shift+F is commonly "find in all files" so it's a logical shortcut to try. In addition, adding Shift to a shortcut to get around this exact problem is also common. For example Ctrl+Shift+C/V are common copy/paste shortcuts in terminal emulators on Linux.