I read a lot of answers online that its a bad idea, but the arguments did not make a lot of sense. “it’s a heavily ingrained part of the eco system”. Well if I can change it, what’s the deal?

It makes more sense to make an interrupt signal be the harder shortcut, and copy to be ctrl+C, matching other programs and platforms.

    • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
      0·
      9 months ago

      Shift+Insert/Ctrl+Insert used to be an IBM thing back in the late 80s. It’s been on PCs since the days of Windows 3.1, but most keyboard with shortcut button labels chose to label ctrl+c/v when GUIs became the norm. Microsoft copied a bunch of IBM’s shortcuts, like using tab to move to the next control and shift+tab to move to a previous control, or alt+f4 for closing a window, or using F5 for refreshing; it’s an interesting bit of legacy that many people don’t know about.

      If you’ve also stuck with Apple/Unix, you’ve probably never noticed any of this. On many *nix platforms, selecting text and then pasting with the middle mouse button was the norm. This also still works today! However, the selection+middle click clipboard is separate from the ctrl+c/ctrl+insert clipboard.

      Oh, I also forgot Shift+Delete for cutting text.

      • azron@lemmy.ml
        0·
        9 months ago

        Linux has two paste buffers, at least in X and I assume Wayland is the same? . One buffer for ctrl-c/ctrl-v and one for selecting text/middle mouse. ctrl-insert and shift-insert are using the “last mouse selected text” paste buffer.