Despite using this combination for several years, my brain seems to
think they are in opposite formation.
What could *possibly* go wrong if I switch them?
Basically
1. I like the verb more ("bmo, wish ..."),
2. it removes potential tab-friendliness conflict with another
sub-command I'm fancying,
3. last, but not least, the obvious alias won't have to be 'bj'.
This will ensure nagging is predictable during session: on first
opportunity (which is normally new terminal window) `tasknag` will nag
about everything, then according to preset intervals.
Use the newer, smarter, xclose rather than the crude gxkill
xclose just closes window instead of killing its owner, which would tear
down all this owner's windows along.
Uses different utilities with a different set of drawbacks, though:
* wmctrl(1) needs to be installed.
* [slop][1] can be optionally installed from source but can be unreliable
when selecting some windows, e.g. urxvt.
* If slop is missing, xwininfo is used, which, unlike xkill(1), has no
way of cancelling the user action (r-click selects a window just the
same as l-click). We work around it using timeout(1), which is
rather inconvenient, though.
But all in all, we're still better off than with xkill(1).
[1]: https://github.com/naelstrof/slop
Sorry, but $mod+BackSpace is too close to Alt+BackSpace
... which means "delete last word" in Bashese/Emacese so I often press
it several times in succession,
Although I should not tolerate own typos, I'm also really getting tired
of accidentally tearing down random windows. Sorry, this is just too
destructive.
Remove 'n' keybindings for keyboard switching (keep code-57)
Code 57 normally means N, so this layout started (rightfully, I admit)
generating conflict errors. Assigning key is probably more reliable,
though, so we'll keeo that one.
Apparently with some distros, raching 0 will turn off the display
completely. Step of 49 makes it easy to avoid that while still keeping
the advantage of huge step.