From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: when to bind *down-mouse* vs *mouse*? Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 20:00:12 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <200412030200.iB320CV26568@raven.dms.auburn.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1102039336 9664 80.91.229.6 (3 Dec 2004 02:02:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 02:02:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 03 03:02:09 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Ca2ls-000819-00 for ; Fri, 03 Dec 2004 03:02:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Ca2vS-0004v8-Ax for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:12:02 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1Ca2vG-0004s2-LK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:11:50 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1Ca2vG-0004rG-0K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:11:50 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Ca2vF-0004qy-Su for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:11:49 -0500 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Ca2lW-0000at-UP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:01:47 -0500 Original-Received: from raven.dms.auburn.edu (raven.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.29]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iB321jFu007420; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 20:01:45 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by raven.dms.auburn.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7) id iB320CV26568; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 20:00:12 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: drew.adams@oracle.com In-reply-to: X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:30622 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:30622 Drew Adams wrote: However, some of the standard bindings seem contradictory to me (but I'm no doubt missing some fundamental logic behind mouse-button bindings): - S-down-mouse-1 is bound to mouse-set-font. - M-mouse-2 is bound to mouse-yank-secondary. and: Can someone clear this up for me? What is the recommendation? What is the logic behind mouse bindings for click events? Are some of the standard bindings inconsistent, or am I just missing something? I do not see any inconsistency in the above. S-down-mouse-1 brings up the Font menu and where you release it (S-mouse-1) determines what happens next. I believe that it is in general preferable to bind click events, rather than button-down events, unless you either want to look for a drag type event or you want a two step process, like the S-down-mouse-1 - S-mouse-1 sequence. >>From `(elisp)Button-Down Events': The usual reason to define a button-down event is so that you can track mouse motion (by reading motion events) until the button is released. Sincerely, Luc.