[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [External] : New key binding syntax
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: [External] : New key binding syntax |
Date: |
Tue, 09 Nov 2021 23:35:38 -0500 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
I agree with your points 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6.
> 7. I'm in favor of letting `kbd' and Help descriptions
> drop the use of angle brackets altogether.
I agree that that would be good -- provided no ambiguity results.
Does anyone see a concrete problem with this?
> 3. Personally, I don't feel a need to allow the
> argument to `kbd' to be used on its own (e.g., passed
> to `define-key" or its replacement), in place of using
> (kbd ARG) - let alone feel a need to prescribe that.
To allow the new syntax in arguments to old functions such as
`define-key' would be desirable if it doesn't cause problems.
But I think it would lead to incompatibilities or conflicts,
where an argument has one meaning as a key sequence (old style)
and another as an argument to `kbd', so I think we can't do it.
I suggest defining new functions to replace `define-key' and friends,
that will take a new-style key sequence as argument and will NOT accept
an old-style key sequence.
> \"S o m\" is _not_ a key sequence. It's not a
> "sequence of the keys 'S', 'o' and 'm'".
I can't make head or tail of that. Why the backslashes
before those doublequotes?
With the default Emacs key bindings, S o m is not a valid
key sequence, because S is not a prefix key.
But it COULD be a valid key sequence if you defined S
as a prefix key, then defined S o as a prefix key.
--
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
- Re: New key binding syntax, (continued)
- Re: New key binding syntax, Yuri Khan, 2021/11/05
- Re: New key binding syntax, Alexandre Garreau, 2021/11/05
- Re: New key binding syntax, Yuri Khan, 2021/11/05
- Re: New key binding syntax, Alexandre Garreau, 2021/11/05
- Re: New key binding syntax, Yuri Khan, 2021/11/05
- Re: New key binding syntax, Richard Stallman, 2021/11/05
- Re: New key binding syntax, Alexandre Garreau, 2021/11/05
- Re: New key binding syntax, Richard Stallman, 2021/11/07
- Re: New key binding syntax, Emanuel Berg, 2021/11/07
RE: [External] : New key binding syntax, Drew Adams, 2021/11/08
- Re: [External] : New key binding syntax,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: [External] : New key binding syntax, Stefan Kangas, 2021/11/10
- RE: [External] : New key binding syntax, Drew Adams, 2021/11/10
- Re: [External] : New key binding syntax, Richard Stallman, 2021/11/12
- RE: [External] : New key binding syntax, Drew Adams, 2021/11/13
- Re: [External] : New key binding syntax, Richard Stallman, 2021/11/15
- Re: [External] : New key binding syntax, Alexandre Garreau, 2021/11/16
- Re: [External] : New key binding syntax, Richard Stallman, 2021/11/17
- Re: [External] : New key binding syntax, Yuri Khan, 2021/11/18
- Re: [External] : New key binding syntax, Alexandre Garreau, 2021/11/18
- Re: [External] : New key binding syntax, Yuri Khan, 2021/11/18