> The universality of copy/paste is overrated. It's literally just adding shift in terminal emulators, no biggie.

I used to think this before I got a job in a Mac-only company. I've since installed Toshy on every Linux machine I own & the difference is night & day. Having to do something extra for terminals to achieve the thing that's so simple & natural (& frequent) in GUIs just feels like terminal emulators are being treated like second class citizens among the installed apps. Having the same shortcuts "Just Work" in exactly the same way through all apps isn't just more convenient, it feels like the OS is elevating terminals to an equal tier of integration.

Which I would've really expected more Linux users would value more than they seem to.

I learned Ctrl-C for "kill program" very nearly before Ctrl-C for copy existed, and long before it existed on any platform I used. I value consistency, but I also value consistency with common practice for the type of application I'm using.

The common failure mode, for me, isn't hitting Ctrl-C for copy in a terminal by mistake, it's hitting Ctrl-Shift-C for copy in a browser and ending up with the console open, or hitting Ctrl-W to delete a word and having it close a tab.

I have the exact opposite problem on a Mac. Things don't just work. You can select text in the terminal and then middle click to paste it. But that only works in the terminal, not anywhere else.

Catches me out a bunch. There is also only a single copy buffer, so to copy from the terminal and paste into a browser I need to replace what was in my clipboard, drives me insane.

> Which I would've really expected more Linux users would value more than they seem to.

Because you get used to it and then don't think about it. I value having two copy buffers over consistency for the sake of consistency.

What exactly does Toshy do for you? The readme is incomprehensible...

For the specific case of copy-paste in a terminal, you either have to press something extra for paste or something extra for SIGINT - there is no secret third option. You could remap copy (bad for muscle memory) or remap sigint (similarly bad for muscle memory, but also confusing since many terminal apps mention CTRL+C explicitly).

I guess a better place for copy/paste would be WIN+C/V, since it feels like a global function and not an app-specific one, but the way clipboard is implemented makes it an app shortcut by necessity. This convention also doesn't hold with things like ALT+TAB (switch windows) and CTRL+Q (close window), both of which feel like "system" shortcuts but don't use WIN.

So I guess my point is...keybinds are already a mess "because legacy" and any attempt at solving that mess would just result in less universality and worse muscle memory, which goes against their whole reason for existing.

In the grand scheme of things, "when in a terminal, press shift to escape key combos" is a very easy convention to get used to. Also work for mouse integration, for example if you have vim open and mouse integration enabled, but want to select and copy using the system clipboard.

I use SIGINT more frequently in a terminal than copy-paste. I suspect this is also true of most power users. That’s why the situation is the way it is.

Also Emacs keybindings. Being able to use your text editor muscle memory for editing in every text field of every native app is fantastic.

> Which I would've really expected more Linux users would value more than they seem to.

It's likely that the users who find this annoying will simply stop using Linux.

> Which I would've really expected more Linux users would value more than they seem to.

We use copy on select... what's all of this keyboard shenanigans /s