RE: [External] : Consistent face for keys in *Help* and `substitute-command-keys'

[Stefan Kangas]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

> What makes you think your highlighting is more
> subtle?  And more subtle than what?  You just
> said that you've never even tried help-fns+.el.

OK, this is a fair point.  I will try help-fns+.el.

>> I also don't know of too many examples where
>> links will be highly useful.
>
> Specifics, please.  Show an example where a
> `...' key link isn't useful.

I actually meant what I wrote literally.

So I would rather have hoped that you have some examples of where it is
"highly useful".

>> Still, I'm not writing off the idea completely,
>> I just don't currently see how to balance the drawbacks.
>
> What drawbacks?  So far, you've talked only
> abstractly, about things that don't exist.

I see two drawbacks:

a) Too many links in the *Help* buffer that compete for attention.

b) Not being able to show a consistent face in the minibuffer and the
   help buffer.  (This is true iff we would use the `button' face also
   for linked keys in *Help*.  Of course we could just not do that, but
   then we have an inconsistent face for the links instead...)

>> The work is mostly to identify the places where we output keys and
>> ensure the strings get the correct face properties applied to them.
>> Therefore, it is unfortunately not much help to start from anything
>> that is not the Emacs source code or a patch to the Emacs source code.
>
> And yet that's what you've done with other parts
> of help-fns+.el...  Suit yourself.

I assume you refer to `describe-keymap'?  That work was very different
in nature.

My point is that it is not always as easy as just re-using some existing
code.  We still need to integrate it in Emacs.  It is of course good
that you offer your code for inclusion, but when you do so in general
terms (rather than, say, as a patch) there is still quite some work
remaining to make it happen.  This was true for a highly isolated
command like `describe-keymap', and even more so for the feature we
discuss here.