Re: Simple Tasks, new TODO category

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Jason Rumney wrote:
> Drew Adams wrote:
> > > Is there any drawback with such a simple design? Could we for example
> > > use char number 1? It should be very easy to implement for w32 and the
> > > other case above (where char 1 is just replaced with & and the other
> > > case where it is replaced with _).
> > >     
> >
> > I haven't followed this. But I would be against having any (printable)
> > character in a menu-item name be interpreted specially and not just 
> > treated
> > as part of the name. It is not the case that some (printable) character
> > "could not possibly be part of the title" - whatever (printable) 
> > character
> > you choose, someone will want to use it in a menu item. `_' can 
> > certainly be
> > useful in a name.
> >   
>
> I understood "char number 1" to mean \001 (C-q C-a), not the digit 1. 
> But I think that is too obscure, it would be better to explicitly define 
> the access key, as in (define-key ...  '(menu-item ... :access-key ?a)).

Perhaps nothing prevent doing that together with the underlying 
implementation I suggested?

But more simple could then be to have a function

   (setq menu-string (add-acc menu-string ?a))

The advantage is of course easy implementation. It works immediately for 
both define-key and easymenu.